This is a neat idea, but I'm not sure I see the need for this specific tool. Shellcheck covers essentially all the errors that are mentioned in the Google Style

This is a neat idea, but I'm not sure I see the need for this specific tool. Shellcheck covers essentially all the errors that are mentioned in the Google Style Guide so I'd just be using that instead. And as the Guide itself, it is mostly OK, but there are a few things I really don't like. For example: - Whatever doc format they use is not as nice to use as shdoc. Namely, you don't have to add the spaces to your comment to make it formatted properly - The 'no tabs' thing is pretty bullshit - Bash is literally the perfect language to use tabs and their "Whatever you do, don’t use tabs" comment really kills me - I don't like their recommendation of using `[[`. Only using `[[` for stuff like regex and glob matching makes it much easier to paste code between Bash and POSIX sh. There are also a few things they forgot to mention, like the lastpipe` shopt option when talking about piping while loops. And maybe it would be nice to recommend using local like `local var=`. But I guess this guide is meant more for new people that don't know all the pitfalls and stuff But I think I agree there is some need for a more extensible linter. I've been eyeing the Bash LSP, which is based off the Bash Tree Sitter parser, but that has quite a few bugs with parsing that I've been meaning to send PR's for. I wonder if `shfmt` has gotten better since I used it. A few years ago, it was quite buggy with prepending extra whitespace whenever I formatted the file