3 ms·
It's the opposite for me; things that are intuitive in Fish would involve inscrutable magic incantations copied from StackOverflow in Bash. If you only want to
by rainingmonkey 2y ago
It's the opposite for me; things that are intuitive in Fish would involve inscrutable magic incantations copied from StackOverflow in Bash.
If you only want to use Fish for the autocompletion though, you can!
Bash is always still there alongside Fish, you can just open a Bash shell when you're copypasting instructions, or `bash $SCRIPT` any scripts.
- oersted 2y agoThat's fair, and that's why I'm happy to keep using Fish. I suppose that I'd just prefer a leaner package and more focus on core features, but it's still my preferred option. It's just that I never find myself needing to do anything fancy in the command line. I just want it to be fast, ergonomic, beautiful and unobtrusive. And I wouldn't say it's because my workload is any simpler, I'm a relatively senior computer engineer working on large-scale data engineering, LLMs, non-trivial webdev and some systems programming in Rust. And it's not because I use UIs more often either, I use the command-line as much as anyone. I guess that I have more of a "RISC" approach to the command-line.