4 ms·
Fish is amazing. And. It was missing critical features like subprocesses for so long (10 years?) that I had to keep passing it by. No subprocesses!
by inciampati 4y ago
Fish is amazing. And. It was missing critical features like subprocesses for so long (10 years?) that I had to keep passing it by. No subprocesses!
- pxc 4y agoI'm not sure what you mean here. The term 'subprocess' doesn't appear in the fish or bash manuals afaict. (Most web search results for the word 'subprocess' paired with the names of various shells are about Python APIs for shelling out to stuff.) The term does appear in an O'Reilly book about the Korn shell, which identifies command substitution (`$()`) as a form of subprocess. But I think Fish has had command substitution from the start. The same goes for job control, which is the only other thing I could think of that you might mean by the term 'subprocess'. There are some old job control bugs, job control behaviors that used to not be POSIX compliant, and one outstanding bug having to do with IO redirection in fish functions that seem like they could be sort of relevant here. But there's nothing I can think of that I could interpret as 'lacking subprocesses'. I only spent a few minutes looking into this, though. I'm curious to know if you can still recall more specifics, so many years later! Maybe there's something from before I started using fish that I've missed here. But fish is only 18 years old, going by the date of its first release, and I've been using it as a daily driver for ~13 years, and it has had everything I might call 'subprocesses' for that entire duration.