Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 56 posts

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#21

Post by vmladenov »

socialdemocrat wrote: post #19

I have used fish for years, it is just painful to watch how other people work with old fashion shells. I applaud this project for bringing fish goodness to more people, although I don’t quite get why people cannot just learn fish. Fish is very simple. There is not that much to learn. Maybe it matters if your write a lot of shell scripts but for anything complicated I use Julia, Python, Go or some other more proper la…

As someone who stopped using fish, I found fzf to be more useful than fish’s history completion so it became less tolerable to have to type `env` in front of the bash oneliners our test runner puts out.

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#22

Post by ridiculous_fish »

vmladenov wrote: post #21
socialdemocrat wrote: post #19

I have used fish for years, it is just painful to watch how other people work with old fashion shells. I applaud this project for bringing fish goodness to more people, although I don’t quite get why people cannot just learn fish. Fish is very simple. There is not that much to learn. Maybe it matters if your write a lot of shell scripts but for anything complicated I use Julia, Python, Go or some other more proper la…

As someone who stopped using fish, I found fzf to be more useful than fish’s history completion so it became less tolerable to have to type `env` in front of the bash oneliners our test runner puts out.

Just noting that fish supports the `var=val cmd` syntax starting in 3.1, so `env` shouldn't be necessary.

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#24

Post by jokethrowaway »

socialdemocrat wrote: post #19

I have used fish for years, it is just painful to watch how other people work with old fashion shells. I applaud this project for bringing fish goodness to more people, although I don’t quite get why people cannot just learn fish. Fish is very simple. There is not that much to learn. Maybe it matters if your write a lot of shell scripts but for anything complicated I use Julia, Python, Go or some other more proper la…

I've used fish in the last few years and zsh before that.

The experience out of the box (coupled with something like starship) is pretty good but I don't like the incompatibility with basic things, like $() vs ().

I also find fish to be a bit on the slow side in some instances, so I think I'll keep tabs on nsh

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#25

Post by adrian_b »

mongol wrote: post #15

> Fish is really neat but I prefer old-fashioned, traditional, and ergonomic shell syntax. What does this really mean? Especially the ergonomic part?

I do not know what was meant, but for example when I have looked at fish, I have seen some features that appeared to be nice, but also some gratuitous changes to the core shell syntax that were not improvements.

For example, replacing "&&" and "||" with "and" and "or", is not an improvement. There are many other such changes that make the shell more verbose without bringing any advantage.

This also happened with the C shell, csh, which introduced some convenient new features for interactive use, but it also included a large number of gratuitous changes in the syntax that were not improvements.

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#26

Post by ChrisSD »

adrian_b wrote: post #25
mongol wrote: post #15

> Fish is really neat but I prefer old-fashioned, traditional, and ergonomic shell syntax. What does this really mean? Especially the ergonomic part?

I do not know what was meant, but for example when I have looked at fish, I have seen some features that appeared to be nice, but also some gratuitous changes to the core shell syntax that were not improvements. For example, replacing "&&" and "||" with "and" and "or", is not an improvement. There are many other such changes that make the shell more verbose without bringing any advantage. This also happened with the…

I find typing `&&` to be annoyingly difficult. I have to hold shift and hunt around for the `7` key (and probably hit `6` or `8` first). Whereas I can type "and" without looking or even really thinking about it.

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#27

Post by sjmulder »

AYBABTME wrote: post #6
yewenjie wrote: post #2

Very cool. I really love fish but sometimes find it very annoying to translate random posix snippets from the web.

The trick is to enter bash from fish, run your command, and then call fish again. (fish)$ bash (fish>bash)$ source ./random.sh (fish>bash)$ fish (fish>bash>fish)$

Would it be better to ‘exec’ the shells to avoid the nesting?

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#28

Post by ridiculous_fish »

adrian_b wrote: post #25
mongol wrote: post #15

> Fish is really neat but I prefer old-fashioned, traditional, and ergonomic shell syntax. What does this really mean? Especially the ergonomic part?

I do not know what was meant, but for example when I have looked at fish, I have seen some features that appeared to be nice, but also some gratuitous changes to the core shell syntax that were not improvements. For example, replacing "&&" and "||" with "and" and "or", is not an improvement. There are many other such changes that make the shell more verbose without bringing any advantage. This also happened with the…

Note fish supports "&&" and "||" as of version 3.0

Re: Nsh: A fish/bash-like Posix shell in Rust

#30

Post by bscphil »

> I don't need customizability

Configuration isn't for you. It's for other people. Configuration is the part of a program that performs the function of making it useful for more than one person. It is the necessary glue that brings together many developers and many users into one project.

Post reply on HN