3 ms·
Both zsh and fish offer the same kinds of improvements over bash. The headline feature of these two is the auto completion user experience. They complete as y
by heads 3y ago
Both zsh and fish offer the same kinds of improvements over bash. The headline feature of these two is the auto completion user experience. They complete as you type, with fish for example showing suggestions in a muted colour ahead of your cursor which you can complete word by word or accept completely.
zsh is a much older project and carries with it a lot of baggage in terms of configuration. fish was designed later and straight out of the box.
Intelligent auto complete is extremely useful if you are constrained with your input either by disability or by using a suboptimal device. Switching to fish really helped for ssh-ing to hosts from my iPhone.
- 9dev 3y ago> Intelligent auto complete is extremely useful if you are constrained with your input either by disability or by using a suboptimal device. Well, assuming you’re a hyper-intelligent being with eidetic memory, that is. The main value of the intelligent completions isn’t conserving keystrokes, but discoverability of input options. It’s the same story for IntelliSense in IDEs.