How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow • Hacker News Board

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#41

Post by lloeki » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 11:57 AM UTC

yaantc wrote: post #18

Fuzzy down selection (fzf) is the big win. In Emacs that would be Helm of swiper. Instead of local completion (tab tab tab ;) do a global search, and narrow down interactively using fuzzy selection. It's really a different experience, a bit disconcerting at first (tab built into muscle memory), but it quickly becomes a one way change. No way I'd let go of fuzzy selection now. The connection with ripgrep is that fuzzy…

The cherry on the cake ultimate big big win for me is that with fzf, fuzzy selection behaves uniformly across all tools in my stack. Before that each one has subtle differences in filtering the resultset from the input, which often threw me off.

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#42

Post by petepete » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 12:08 PM UTC

petepete wrote: post #4

Avi-D-coder wrote: post #3

Shameless plug FZF even works well as a dictionary/word autocompleter. https://github.com/Avi-D-coder/fzf-wordnet.vim

Neat. I use it for all kinds of stuff in Rails Feb, from searching routes and rake tasks to finding Cucumber step definitions. I'd recommend using fd for listing files as it offers lots of filtering options right out of the box - much more useable than find imho. https://github.com/sharkdp/fd

I can't edit now, but that was typed on my phone and it autocorrected 'dev' to 'Feb'. Amazing.

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#43

Post by dorfsmay » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 12:26 PM UTC

This looks interesting and I'm going to play with it, but if you still still pipe PS into grep before killing, 'pkill -f' will do exactly what you want 80% of the time.

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#44

Post by grosswait » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 12:42 PM UTC

iamnotacrook wrote: post #40

hdfbdtbcdg wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do hope you don't do this on production servers!

Who develops on production servers?

Not everyone is a developer. Still have application and system admins, especially where segregation of duties exists due to security requirements

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#45

Post by marble-drink » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 12:58 PM UTC

lloeki wrote: post #41

yaantc wrote: post #18

Fuzzy down selection (fzf) is the big win. In Emacs that would be Helm of swiper. Instead of local completion (tab tab tab ;) do a global search, and narrow down interactively using fuzzy selection. It's really a different experience, a bit disconcerting at first (tab built into muscle memory), but it quickly becomes a one way change. No way I'd let go of fuzzy selection now. The connection with ripgrep is that fuzzy…

The cherry on the cake ultimate big big win for me is that with fzf, fuzzy selection behaves uniformly across all tools in my stack. Before that each one has subtle differences in filtering the resultset from the input, which often threw me off.

That's why emacs users tend to use emacs for everything. Ultimately, everything we do is all text. Editing source code, writing notes, searching through documents, writing emails. It's natural to want to use your favourite tool for all of your text editing needs.

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#46

Post by IronBacon » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 12:59 PM UTC

Using FZF to search the shell history is great until you don't find the command you were searching, you need to abort and what you typed is canceled. That's my only gripe with it.

I've tried to play with Zsh's Zle but wasn't able to find a way to abort FZF and retain the input, I suppose I need to modify FZF itself.

If there's a way to do it with Zsh I'm all ears...

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#47

Post by marble-drink » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 1:00 PM UTC

yaantc wrote: post #18

Fuzzy down selection (fzf) is the big win. In Emacs that would be Helm of swiper. Instead of local completion (tab tab tab ;) do a global search, and narrow down interactively using fuzzy selection. It's really a different experience, a bit disconcerting at first (tab built into muscle memory), but it quickly becomes a one way change. No way I'd let go of fuzzy selection now. The connection with ripgrep is that fuzzy…

ido-mode was the standard back in the day. I have since moved to ivy/swiper but it was ido-mode that showed me the way some ten years ago (or more).

One sad thing about FZF is that it doesn't also support tab-completion. Both ido and ivy support both tab-completion and fuzzy searching at the same time. They compliment each other really well and make these both much more general purpose tools. One import application is when your search space is a tree (like a file system). FZF sucks at that and the authors have no interest in supporting tab-completion or trees.

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#48

Post by hwj » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 1:03 PM UTC

fzy[1], which is written in C, seems to be slightly faster:

    $ hyperfine --warmup 2 -r 10 'rg --files | fzy -e hello'  'rg --files | fzf -f hello'
    Benchmark #1: rg --files | fzy -e hello
      Time (mean ± σ):     153.6 ms ±  57.9 ms    [User: 399.2 ms, System: 96.9 ms]
      Range (min … max):    85.9 ms … 244.3 ms    10 runs
     
    Benchmark #2: rg --files | fzf -f hello
      Time (mean ± σ):     210.5 ms ±  61.6 ms    [User: 443.3 ms, System: 90.9 ms]
      Range (min … max):   123.3 ms … 315.5 ms    10 runs
     
    Summary
      'rg --files | fzy -e hello' ran
        1.37 ± 0.65 times faster than 'rg --files | fzf -f hello'

[1] https://github.com/jhawthorn/fzy

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#49

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 1:22 PM UTC

iamnotacrook wrote: post #9

roryrjb wrote: post #7

I can't really fault both of these tools at all. They have good defaults and are easy to configure and are well documented. Of course they are very performant too, but if you take the time to configuring your wildignore, learn how to use find's and rgrep's flags (maybe script some of this with shell or vimscript if necessary) you can get close to the performance of these tools and define your own usability if needed.…

Not to argue with you as I see where you're coming from (all things being equal I too usually go with the defaults) but the argument about "not having to install and setup additional tools...on lots of different machines" is very weak in these days of: git clone https://gitlab.com/myaccount/mydotfiles followed by an optional: ./deploy_stuff_if_required which for me I have working on any number of linux boxes as well…

[deleted]

Re: How FZF and ripgrep improved my workflow

#50

Post by hdfbdtbcdg » Fri, Jul 05, 2019, 1:24 PM UTC

marble-drink wrote: post #45

lloeki wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cherry on the cake ultimate big big win for me is that with fzf, fuzzy selection behaves uniformly across all tools in my stack. Before that each one has subtle differences in filtering the resultset from the input, which often threw me off.

That's why emacs users tend to use emacs for everything. Ultimately, everything we do is all text. Editing source code, writing notes, searching through documents, writing emails. It's natural to want to use your favourite tool for all of your text editing needs.

Why would choose such a terrible text editor then?