I switched from bash to zsh a while ago, mostly just for shits and giggles. I really can’t see any reason to form a strong opinion on it one way or the other.
He should be awarded a prize for services to womens’ horticulture, given the number of women at MIT who filled their offices with houseplants just to keep him away.
I went from bash to fish to zsh. I can see why people would like having fish as a shell. but I hated scripting on it and if I’m going to be triggering a different shell for scripts anyway, I might as well skip the middleman, not re-invent the wheel and just use zsh with plug-ins that way I only have two shells installed instead of three. Adding the auto-complete plugin and a theme plugin for zsh gives most of fishes base functionality and design while making it so I don’t nerd to worry about compatibility.
Maybe someday when I’m less code oriented, I will re-look at fish, but I don’t see it happening in the foreseeable future.
Heh. I script nearly everything in fish now, because it’s way more expedient and readable. [At first I didn’t, just thought its advantages are interactive. Better scripting snuck up on me.]
zsh actually predates fish by almost 15 years so yes I would say it’s re-inventing the wheel.
Fish is known as what’s called an exotic shell, meaning that it doesn’t adhere to what is considered standard for Linux systems, which would be positive compliance. Now most alternative shells have partial compliance, not full compliance. But fish didn’t have any compliance. It didn’t attempt it. Like you mentioned, its use case was meant to be an interactive shell. So scripting on it was a back burner project.
If it works for you, then so be it. But, I tried it, hated the lack of information available for it, and hated the way that it didn’t follow standards. And at the end of the day, anything I made for it was exclusively for me due to the fact that I could no longer share configurations or chains with anyone else because they did not have fish shell.
I switched from bash to zsh a while ago, mostly just for shits and giggles. I really can’t see any reason to form a strong opinion on it one way or the other.
Bash is copyleft (GPLv3). Zsh is permissively-licensed.
Apple, for instance, switched from bash to zsh when the GPL version upgraded because they wanted to withhold those rights from their users.
Zsh should be considered harmful as a tool of corporate encroachment and subjugation of Free Software.
Calm down RMS, you’re going to have another episode.
His episodes are just him being right over and over and us refusing to listen
He is always right.
Except for that one time.
He should be awarded a prize for services to womens’ horticulture, given the number of women at MIT who filled their offices with houseplants just to keep him away.
Well and also eating his own feet
Removed by mod
I went from bash to fish to zsh. I can see why people would like having fish as a shell. but I hated scripting on it and if I’m going to be triggering a different shell for scripts anyway, I might as well skip the middleman, not re-invent the wheel and just use zsh with plug-ins that way I only have two shells installed instead of three. Adding the auto-complete plugin and a theme plugin for zsh gives most of fishes base functionality and design while making it so I don’t nerd to worry about compatibility.
Maybe someday when I’m less code oriented, I will re-look at fish, but I don’t see it happening in the foreseeable future.
Heh. I script nearly everything in fish now, because it’s way more expedient and readable. [At first I didn’t, just thought its advantages are interactive. Better scripting snuck up on me.]
Wouldnt ZSH be the wasted middle in your analogy?
Fish wheel already invented, no contrived middle.
zsh actually predates fish by almost 15 years so yes I would say it’s re-inventing the wheel.
Fish is known as what’s called an exotic shell, meaning that it doesn’t adhere to what is considered standard for Linux systems, which would be positive compliance. Now most alternative shells have partial compliance, not full compliance. But fish didn’t have any compliance. It didn’t attempt it. Like you mentioned, its use case was meant to be an interactive shell. So scripting on it was a back burner project.
If it works for you, then so be it. But, I tried it, hated the lack of information available for it, and hated the way that it didn’t follow standards. And at the end of the day, anything I made for it was exclusively for me due to the fact that I could no longer share configurations or chains with anyone else because they did not have fish shell.
If you wanna try something different, give nushell a try. It’s like magic to me.
I don’t have an opinion either but you could try using Starship on top of ZSH:
It’s supposedly lighter than OhMyZSH with the same features.