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

Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

fishshell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 204 posts

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#111

Post by poincaredisk »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #49
pzmarzly wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I went the other way about 7 years ago - switched from fish to zsh (initially with oh-my-zsh). The interactive experience was similar enough on both shells, and the performance was great on fish and okay-ish on zsh, but two things won me over: 1. With zsh, I can copy-paste some bash snippet and in 99% of cases it will just work. Aside of copy-pasting from StackExchange, I also know a lot of bash syntax b…

FWIW, fish is much more bash-compatible these days. We've introduced support for a lot of bash-isms that don't completely break the fish spirit or clash with its syntax in the last few releases.

I personally liked "; and" but... "&&" solves around half of the problems with copy-pasting and does not look terrible, so it was probably the right thing to add.

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#112

Post by runiq »

underdeserver wrote: post #73

The tone in the "The Timeline" section seems apologetic: > The initial PR had a timeline of “handwaving, half a year”. It was clear to all of us that it might very well be entirely off, and we’re not disappointed that it was. I'm amazed that you estimated it at so little time originally, and I'm amazed you shipped it in full in just 2 years. Congrats!

Absolutely. Staying within an order of magnitude for a project of this size is just really good eyeballing. :)

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#113

Post by mst »

_zagj wrote: post #107
thayne wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither c++ nor rust is a clear winner in portability and platform support. C++ is available on more platforms, but in some ways rust makes it easier to support multiple platforms than it is in c++, for example using rustup to install the latest version of the compiler. What they got from this isn't that they can now support more platforms, but that they now don't have to spend as much effort on supporting dealing wi…

> Neither c++ nor rust is a clear winner in portability C++ is the clear winner in portability because of GCC and the wealth of platforms it supports. You can argue you don't care about supporting, e.g., OpenBSD on PPC, but trying to hand-wave away this advantage C++ has over Rust is disingenuous.

C++ is the clear winner in what portability is possible.

But as they outlined, in a lot of cases achieving it is substantially more effort per arch+OS+version target than Rust.

Getting a better ROI on your time is a valid reason to consider something better for your use cases.

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#114

Post by whytevuhuni »

_zagj wrote: post #107
thayne wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither c++ nor rust is a clear winner in portability and platform support. C++ is available on more platforms, but in some ways rust makes it easier to support multiple platforms than it is in c++, for example using rustup to install the latest version of the compiler. What they got from this isn't that they can now support more platforms, but that they now don't have to spend as much effort on supporting dealing wi…

> Neither c++ nor rust is a clear winner in portability C++ is the clear winner in portability because of GCC and the wealth of platforms it supports. You can argue you don't care about supporting, e.g., OpenBSD on PPC, but trying to hand-wave away this advantage C++ has over Rust is disingenuous.

It's not disingenuous, you just missed this part:

> but in some ways rust makes it easier to support multiple platforms than it is in c++

The ease of installing Rust on Windows has helped build a culture of cross-platform libraries/crates, and so it's significantly easier to build applications that support more platforms than C++.

Take a library for coloring text on a console, and chances are, it'll work on cmd.exe too (despite that not even using ANSI escape codes).

Take a library for loading other libraries, and it will load .so, .dll, and .dylib too, with feature-gated methods to deal with each platform's quirks.

Rust's standard library helps a bit, e.g. it isolates platform-specific modules into things like std::os::unix and std::os::windows, so it's a bit more obvious when you're trying to use something that won't work on all platforms.

However, it's more just a cultural thing; many Rust things work cross-platform now, people see how nice that is, and so people try to maintain the status quo.

With C++, you often need MSYS or Cygwin, and those have their own limitations; you can certainly make something in C++ that won't need them, it's just harder in comparison.

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#115

Post by ramon156 »

scop wrote: post #11

I remember switching from bash to zsh a few years back and thinking I was the bees knees. After the switch trying other shells seemed like bike-shedding because, I mean, what more could a shell? Then I got a new computer and decided to start from scratch with my tooling and downloaded fish. I was shocked how it instantly made zsh feel cumbersome and ancient . Heartily recommend others give it a try as a daily driver…

We had the exact same experience, still in love with fish!

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#117

Post by djoldman »

> 57K Lines of C++ to 75K Lines of Rust

...

> A lot of the increase in line count can be explained by rustfmt’s formatting, as it likes to spread code out over multiple lines, like: ...

I wonder what the character count diff is?

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#118

Post by lawn »

nindalf wrote: post #105
outlore wrote: post #86

I am curious to ask others here, are there other low-config alternative tools like Fish that, looking back, now seem like a no brainer? Ghostty is a recent example, Helix seems like another. I’d love to know about other tools people are using that have improved or simplified their lives.

Agree with you on helix. I love it. Atuin for improved history search. Starship for an improved shell prompt. zoxide - better cd ripgrep - better grep just - a command runner. I put project specific commands/scripts in there so I don’t have to remember. All of these are indispensable for me.

fd a better find is one I like.

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#119

Post by saagarjha »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #50
johnthuss wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I write all my scripts with the hash bang as "#! /bin/bash" so even though fish is my interactive shell, I still use bash for all shell scripts. I think the restrictions you mention only apply if you use "#! /bin/sh" rather than bash specifically.

Just fyi, you should use `#!/usr/bin/env bash` instead of `#!/bin/bash` or whatever because you can't assume the location of bash (but the location of `env` is indeed portably fixed). e.g. FreeBSD (and macOS?) has bash at `/usr/local/bin/bash`

bash is /bin/bash on macOS, unless the user really likes bash, in which case it's probably /opt/homebrew/bin/bash or /opt/local/bin/bash

Re: Fish 4.0: The Fish of Theseus

#120

Post by saagarjha »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #74
aragilar wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully expect fish 4.0 to be in openwrt (because openwrt runs on x86_64), but what percentage openwrt machines have the space to run it would be interesting (I suspect it won't be an issue, as likely those near the lower limit of openwrt are probably sticking with busybox anyway, and not installing a different shell). Personally, what I want is inexpensive hardware (routers, but also storage devices) that don't use…

I know rust-fish is being used on at least some non-x86_64 non-aarch64 routers because we've accepted patches by those users to make it build on platforms without native 64-bit CAS.

That would be any pre-ARMv8.1 machine?
Post reply on HN