4 ms·
> The best reason to choose fish over zsh is that everything works so well out of the box that you stop messing with it. This is such an incredibly odd perspec
by bscphil 5y ago
> The best reason to choose fish over zsh is that everything works so well out of the box that you stop messing with it.
This is such an incredibly odd perspective to me. I use zsh and have not touched my shell config in years. Messing with configurations to get things working to your liking is a one time thing. I don't even use plugins.
On the other hand, if fish doesn't work to your liking out of the box, and for many people it does not, there's no "messing with it" that's possible. You are forced to give up and use something else. Your reason to choose fish is only a good reason if you already agree with every minute choice the developers made and refuse to let you adjust.
- OJFord 5y ago> On the other hand, if fish doesn't work to your liking out of the box, and for many people it does not, there's no "messing with it" that's possible. What do you want to do that isn't possible? I also haven't messed with it in months if not more (fish in my case, not zsh) but years ago I messed with the prompt a lot to get it to my liking. (From a previous zsh config.) It was perfectly possible.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- shakna 5y ago> On the other hand, if fish doesn't work to your liking out of the box, and for many people it does not, there's no "messing with it" that's possible. You are forced to give up and use something else. Your reason to choose fish is only a good reason if you already agree with every minute choice the developers made and refuse to let you adjust. Which part of fish makes this impossible? You can tweak the startup, the completions, the key bindings, the prompt, and so on.