▲ 95 ▼ Fish Shell 4.8 Improves History Search, Scripting, and Completions (linuxiac.com) submitted 1 month ago by cm0002@lemy.lol to c/linux@programming.dev 18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 month ago (7 children) Why do people seem to especially like fish? permalink fedilink source hideshow 14 child comments replies: [+] EchoDelta_9@programming.dev 29 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tyler@programming.dev 1 point 1 month ago* exact same experience I had. used bash for years, got so tired of it, switched to zsh with plugins and it was amazing, but so slow to load. Finally got tired of that and tried fish and it's just zsh, but ... good ... I've never had issues with fish as login shell though. Probably niche OSes permalink fedilink source parent [–] Laser@feddit.org 15 points 1 month ago It's just a very nice shell that's conceptually very close to common shells like bash and others while it has a nicer syntax than those. All in all very reasonable and rather evolutionary than revolutionary. So the learning curve is rather flat compared to shells like nu or elvish permalink fedilink source parent [–] rozodru@piefed.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 child) it's zsh without having to add in all the plugins. on my NixOS systems zsh+plugins caused it to run slow. Fish just doesn't have that issue as everything is baked into it. setting up functions is also a breeze and the built in themes are great. just one install and no need to configure much if anything. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tyler@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago yeah pretty much every zsh plugin loader have filed issues about the long load times and running slowly. fish just doesn't have that. it starts as fast as zsh with no plugins, and it's a better all around experience. permalink fedilink source parent [–] KssioAug@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago For me is it's awesome, out of the box, syntax highlighting, auto-suggestions/auto-complete and the up arrow history function (that includes substrings). permalink fedilink source parent [–] kogasa@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago Completions, plugins, and themes built in. It's fine. I still use bash for scripting but fish for interactive terminals is nice with little effort. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) As a ux/ui nerd for me its mostly that its a very thoughtful user experience. I have been more or less good at the terminal at different points in time, but if you don't spend much time there its easy to forget every command and how to do things. And ultimately, I don't really enjoy using it as an interface. Its a blank void with little to nothing in the way of affordances-- remember the magic words and you can do anything. But the fact its only used by technical folks means often no one cares to add affordances or ease of use even when it might be possible, and when they do its from a power user perspective. Fish feels like a much more thoughtful execution of how to interact with a command line interface, and doesnt require a ton of time spent in a terminal to achieve that better ux. Though I still want to set up a nice prompt that improves legibility and make things a bit easier still, I just haven't played with starship enough yet. There are more things I'd wish for in a perfect world, but for me fish is a very nice step in the right direction :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Well said! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 2 points 1 month ago Thanks ☺️ Hope you have a lovely day! permalink fedilink source parent [–] tyler@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago zero downsides and all upsides? like, zsh with plugins is just fish out of the box. I used zsh for a long long time (and several other shells), but with the plugins you want to have you immediately hit long loading times to actually start your shell. and then when it's finally loaded it's still a worse experience than fish. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] EchoDelta_9@programming.dev 29 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tyler@programming.dev 1 point 1 month ago* exact same experience I had. used bash for years, got so tired of it, switched to zsh with plugins and it was amazing, but so slow to load. Finally got tired of that and tried fish and it's just zsh, but ... good ... I've never had issues with fish as login shell though. Probably niche OSes permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tyler@programming.dev 1 point 1 month ago* exact same experience I had. used bash for years, got so tired of it, switched to zsh with plugins and it was amazing, but so slow to load. Finally got tired of that and tried fish and it's just zsh, but ... good ... I've never had issues with fish as login shell though. Probably niche OSes permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Laser@feddit.org 15 points 1 month ago It's just a very nice shell that's conceptually very close to common shells like bash and others while it has a nicer syntax than those. All in all very reasonable and rather evolutionary than revolutionary. So the learning curve is rather flat compared to shells like nu or elvish permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rozodru@piefed.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 child) it's zsh without having to add in all the plugins. on my NixOS systems zsh+plugins caused it to run slow. Fish just doesn't have that issue as everything is baked into it. setting up functions is also a breeze and the built in themes are great. just one install and no need to configure much if anything. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tyler@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago yeah pretty much every zsh plugin loader have filed issues about the long load times and running slowly. fish just doesn't have that. it starts as fast as zsh with no plugins, and it's a better all around experience. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tyler@programming.dev 0 points 1 month ago yeah pretty much every zsh plugin loader have filed issues about the long load times and running slowly. fish just doesn't have that. it starts as fast as zsh with no plugins, and it's a better all around experience. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] KssioAug@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago For me is it's awesome, out of the box, syntax highlighting, auto-suggestions/auto-complete and the up arrow history function (that includes substrings). permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kogasa@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago Completions, plugins, and themes built in. It's fine. I still use bash for scripting but fish for interactive terminals is nice with little effort. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 4 points 1 month ago* (1 child) As a ux/ui nerd for me its mostly that its a very thoughtful user experience. I have been more or less good at the terminal at different points in time, but if you don't spend much time there its easy to forget every command and how to do things. And ultimately, I don't really enjoy using it as an interface. Its a blank void with little to nothing in the way of affordances-- remember the magic words and you can do anything. But the fact its only used by technical folks means often no one cares to add affordances or ease of use even when it might be possible, and when they do its from a power user perspective. Fish feels like a much more thoughtful execution of how to interact with a command line interface, and doesnt require a ton of time spent in a terminal to achieve that better ux. Though I still want to set up a nice prompt that improves legibility and make things a bit easier still, I just haven't played with starship enough yet. There are more things I'd wish for in a perfect world, but for me fish is a very nice step in the right direction :) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Well said! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 2 points 1 month ago Thanks ☺️ Hope you have a lovely day! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 child) Well said! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 2 points 1 month ago Thanks ☺️ Hope you have a lovely day! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 2 points 1 month ago Thanks ☺️ Hope you have a lovely day! permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tyler@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago zero downsides and all upsides? like, zsh with plugins is just fish out of the box. I used zsh for a long long time (and several other shells), but with the plugins you want to have you immediately hit long loading times to actually start your shell. and then when it's finally loaded it's still a worse experience than fish. permalink fedilink source parent