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

Fish shell

fishshell.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 188 posts

Re: Fish shell

#151

Post by talex5 »

I've been using fish for a few months now (switched from zsh). Really nice to have good defaults and minimal configuration, and the suggestions based on previously entered commands are great.

The main issues I have compared to zsh are:

- No bracketed paste mode. If I select multiple lines of text and middle-click-paste into zsh, it adds the whole lot as a multi-line input and lets me review the commands before pressing Return. fish just starts blindly executing them, which can cause accidents.

- Chaining commands is harder. In zsh `foo |& less` pipes stdout and stderr. Also, fish's `foo; and bar` is longer than `foo && bar`.

- Hashes in words start a comment in fish. e.g. `opam pin repo#branch` is treated as `opam pin repo`, pinning the wrong branch. zsh only treats # as a comment at the start of a new word.

- While completion history and `set -U` are really useful, it sometimes forgets everything and I have to start again, which is quite annoying.

On the whole, very happy with it though!

Re: Fish shell

#152

Post by aerique »

BorisMelnik wrote: post #136

I've been a Linux command line (bash) user for 20+ years now and I must say, I would really consider switching to this. I haven't even started to dig into the features yet, but the filename and parameter completion alone is enough to stop me from pulling my hair out. Filenames are getting very long w/ so many special characters, this is great. I also like the idea of having a web based config. I really won't miss wre…

I've been using Unix (and mainly Linux) for 20+ years as well. First using bash, then zsh the last couple of years and I recently switched to fish. The switch was fairly effortless and it took maybe 2 days to not even notice the differences anymore. I do have to look up some things now and then but overall it has been an improvement.

What I like about fish shell is the same why I use the i3 tiling window manager. It has sane defaults and it clicks with how expect things to work, how I would design them. Sane defaults mean a minimal config file so it's easy to look up problems and change things.

I'd at least try it out if I were you.

Re: Fish shell

#153

Post by sspiff »

PSeitz wrote: post #148
ridiculous_fish wrote: post #100

Hey, I'm the lead dev of the fish shell. There's some great discussion in this thread! For those who are interested, the fish shell is about to release version 2.2, a very significant release that wraps up eighteen months of development. You can try the beta now: http://fishshell.com/beta/ A sampling of new features: - vi mode (yay!) - Abbreviations, fish's take on aliases. They expand as you type them. - A new "inli…

Hi, can you tell how it competes to cmder and iterm? I use these currently in windows and osx

Not sure about this (I haven't used either, just looked at their sites), but I believe those are terminal emulators. They're the thing that displays the shell and handle input and copy/paste etc.

The shell is what actually handles key presses and produces the output (handling commands, input/output redirection, etc).

They're not the same thing - I bet you could use fish inside cmder or iterm.

Re: Fish shell

#154

Post by tokenizerrr »

PSeitz wrote: post #148
ridiculous_fish wrote: post #100

Hey, I'm the lead dev of the fish shell. There's some great discussion in this thread! For those who are interested, the fish shell is about to release version 2.2, a very significant release that wraps up eighteen months of development. You can try the beta now: http://fishshell.com/beta/ A sampling of new features: - vi mode (yay!) - Abbreviations, fish's take on aliases. They expand as you type them. - A new "inli…

Hi, can you tell how it competes to cmder and iterm? I use these currently in windows and osx

I'd say it doesn't since neither of those are shells. They're both terminal emulators that run a shell within them, usually bash for linux/mac or cmd for windows.

Re: Fish shell

#155

Post by black_knight »

Fish and zsh grew out of bash, which again was a free replacement of Bourne Shell — but from Bourne Shell there was another interesting development, namely rc[0]. rc was developed at Bell Labs as the successor of Bourne shell. I usually prefer its syntax to the bash derivatives when scripting. It has a much cleaner feel to it.

[0] http://plan9.bell-labs.com/sys/doc/rc.html

Re: Fish shell

#156

Post by oahziur »

0942v8653 wrote: post #25

I used to use fish, and emacs. But when I switched to vim, I had to switch away from fish as well because of its lack of vi bindings. It is a little disappointing to go back to using bash, but as long as bash-completion is working, it's not really a big issue. Of course, I do miss the syntax highlighting. (I would use zsh, but it provides little benefit over bash out of the box and is slower (oh-my-zsh is unbearably…

I really miss Control+R when I use fish. I also prefer to click Control+R again instead of using the inconvenient up arrow key to search the history.

Re: Fish shell

#157

Post by PSeitz »

sspiff wrote: post #153
PSeitz wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, can you tell how it competes to cmder and iterm? I use these currently in windows and osx

Not sure about this (I haven't used either, just looked at their sites), but I believe those are terminal emulators. They're the thing that displays the shell and handle input and copy/paste etc. The shell is what actually handles key presses and produces the output (handling commands, input/output redirection, etc). They're not the same thing - I bet you could use fish inside cmder or iterm.

Ah okay now I get it, so it's comparable to bash or zsh

Re: Fish shell

#158

Post by jwarren »

I used fish for at least a year, maybe more. I eventually switched away to zsh. Whichever theme I used, rendering the status of git repos took ages, and the breaks from Bash syntax were just a bit too much.

I loved the overall friendliness though, it was a genuine pleasure to use for the most part. I hope to use it as my default shell again some time in the future.

Re: Fish shell

#159

Post by bert_cwchang »

jwarren wrote: post #158

I used fish for at least a year, maybe more. I eventually switched away to zsh. Whichever theme I used, rendering the status of git repos took ages, and the breaks from Bash syntax were just a bit too much. I loved the overall friendliness though, it was a genuine pleasure to use for the most part. I hope to use it as my default shell again some time in the future.

> Whichever theme I used, rendering the status of git repos took ages I don't think this is fish's issue. In fact, this will happen in any shell (bash / zsh) if your git repo is big. The solution is either (0) speed up `git status`-like commands by enable git cache, or (1) use async showing git repo status just like prezto.

Re: Fish shell

#160

Post by codychan »

ridiculous_fish wrote: post #144
codychan wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/c02y/dotfiles/blob/master/fish/.config/fi...

Thanks, I opened an issue at https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/2073 . I wasn't able to reproduce any problems with your config.fish, so if you feel up for chiming in that would be great.

I haven't pushed my local conf.fish file to Github for months (but I think it is no big difference), I'll test the v2.2-beta later at home in my local.fish and push it to Github, maybe you can test it then.
Post reply on HN