4 ms·
Here is my TLDR: Writing scripts: #!/usr/bin/env bash (or #!/usr/bin/env sh for POSIX-compliance) Use fish for interactive shell. It's faster than zsh Zsh se
by ducktective 5y ago
Here is my TLDR:
Writing scripts: #!/usr/bin/env bash (or #!/usr/bin/env sh for POSIX-compliance)
Use fish for interactive shell. It's faster than zsh
Zsh seem to have more plugins
- eddyg 5y agoIn what ways is fish faster than zsh? I can be believe it’s faster than a poorly configured zsh (which unfortunately is quite common), but would be curious to see actual test results, with things like “input lag”, “time to first prompt”, “command lag”, etc. like is measured with the excellent zsh-bench (https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench#what-it-measures https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench#what-it-measures)
- ducktective 5y agoI've never tried zsh. I remember reading in the interwebz that if you go towards feature-parity with fish in a zsh setup, the latencies here and there, adds up and makes it slower than fish. Here is a relevant blog post: https://carlosbecker.com/posts/fish/ https://carlosbecker.com/posts/fish/ But yeah, I don't have any proofs.
- eddyg 5y agoYeah, that blog post is doing exactly what https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench#how-not-to-benchmark https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench#how-not-to-benchmark says not to do...