3 ms·
I have used fish for years, it is just painful to watch how other people work with old fashion shells. I applaud this project for bringing fish goodness to mor
by socialdemocrat 5y ago
I have used fish for years, it is just painful to watch how other people work with old fashion shells.
I applaud this project for bringing fish goodness to more people, although I don’t quite get why people cannot just learn fish. Fish is very simple. There is not that much to learn.
Maybe it matters if your write a lot of shell scripts but for anything complicated I use Julia, Python, Go or some other more proper language.
To me shells are mainly for interactive work and really simple scripts without control flow, beyond perhaps a for loop.
- vmladenov 5y agoAs someone who stopped using fish, I found fzf to be more useful than fish’s history completion so it became less tolerable to have to type `env` in front of the bash oneliners our test runner puts out.
- ridiculous_fish 5y agoJust noting that fish supports the `var=val cmd` syntax starting in 3.1, so `env` shouldn't be necessary.
- jokethrowaway 5y agoI've used fish in the last few years and zsh before that. The experience out of the box (coupled with something like starship) is pretty good but I don't like the incompatibility with basic things, like $() vs (). I also find fish to be a bit on the slow side in some instances, so I think I'll keep tabs on nsh