11–20 of 101 posts
switched from ag to rg a few months ago and have nothing but good things to say about the experience.
alias rg='rg -S'
to my .bashrc so that rg had the same default case sensitivity as ag.
switched from ag to rg a few months ago and have nothing but good things to say about the experience.
Ripgrep works like a charm
Ack requires Perl, which I am not going to install just for that purpose.
as a long time user of `find . -name "*.foo" -exec grep -Hin {} \;` moving to ack has been great! I love the syntax and the speed and the fact that it actually respects your ignore files. ripgrep is great too. ag on the other hand is recommended by everyone but doesn't seem to respect ignores or understand modern ignore syntax. give it a pass. https://github.com/ggreer/the_silver_searcher/issues/385 its been over 4 y…
But you know there's a -r for recursive, right? And unless you are using some historic relic of grep that is not GNU or BSD and doesn't understand the --include option you can just do:
grep -rin "needle" --include "*.foo" .
switched from ag to rg a few months ago and have nothing but good things to say about the experience.
Same here. Ripgrep works like a charm Ack requires Perl, which I am not going to install just for that purpose.
Don't know how you'd pull it off in the current tabular format, but would be great to include some of the UX side of things: For example, I use rg almost exclusively because it has an easy-to remember syntax (`rg search-string` is a recursive search), attractively colored and well-organized output, and seems much faster compared to other tools in my use cases.
rg for the win. It's not some huge improvement, but it's more of a feeling that things just work by default (similar to what I get from tmux vs screen).
Aren't those the same thing? Shouldn't they be grouped for better comparison?