3 ms·

FWIW, fish is much more bash-compatible these days. We've introduced support for a lot of bash-isms that don't completely break the fish spirit or clash with it

FWIW, fish is much more bash-compatible these days. We've introduced support for a lot of bash-isms that don't completely break the fish spirit or clash with its syntax in the last few releases.

poincaredisk 2y ago
I personally liked "; and" but... "&&" solves around half of the problems with copy-pasting and does not look terrible, so it was probably the right thing to add.
zX41ZdbW 2y ago
Thanks! I'm trying fish once in a while, and currently, the following are missing: $ cat <(echo "Hello") Hello $ cat <<<"Test" Test
- jcgl 2y ago
  In regards to the former, you use the psub function instead of special syntax (a pattern that fish often follows): $ cat (echo Hello | psub)
- jcgl 2y ago
  Also, fish doesn't have here-strings/here-docs, I believe. That is far and away the main thing I miss in fish.