21–30 of 151 posts
The site1 site2 substitution slide is at best disingenuous; I believe in bash you could type ^site1^site2 and get the same result.
The idea, I believe, is when your browsing around multiple versions of the same directory structure. The 'cd site1 site2' allows you to jump directly to the equivalent directory in the other structure.
The equivalent in bash would be something like: cd `pwd | sed 's/tmp1/tmp2/'`
Problem is zsh is not omnipresent like bash is. I'm sure that if you use zsh you also use Plan 9, code in D, write LuaTeX in Emacs and wear a monocle.
I don't get your point. I use zsh+oh-my-zsh, and I don't know what Plan 9 is, don't code in D, never used LuaTeX (esp. not in Emacs), and I don't happen to wear a monocle. In fact I find zsh much easier for beginners and people who don't master the arcane intricacies of *nix.
I always have fun to see junior guys trying their way around such systems.
I love using zsh (in combination with oh-my-zsh) on OSX but the only thing I've noticed after using it a year is that it's becoming very very slow. As in, it usually takes me 5-10 seconds to login to a new session (locally) and be able to see the prompt and type something. Tab auto completion takes a second or two (even for files). Combined with the git plugin I have enabled (which does "git status" on every prompt i…
The only recourse I think is to go back to a clean zsh and build your own .zshrc. There are other leaner zsh "frameworks"[1] I have read of, but i intend going back to stock zsh soon.
1) - see zshuery and zsh-m on github.
Try it. It's better.
Problem is zsh is not omnipresent like bash is. I'm sure that if you use zsh you also use Plan 9, code in D, write LuaTeX in Emacs and wear a monocle.
I don't use Plan 9, code in D or write LuaTeX, but I do use Emacs and wear a monocle. The last two are not a coincidence as the first (arguably more adequate substitute for God), invariably leads to the latter, most excellent eye wear.
And a note to my Mac friends : "Using csh is like trying to type with your feets[sic] (if you're used to zsh or ksh)."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get your point. I use zsh+oh-my-zsh, and I don't know what Plan 9 is, don't code in D, never used LuaTeX (esp. not in Emacs), and I don't happen to wear a monocle. In fact I find zsh much easier for beginners and people who don't master the arcane intricacies of *nix.
I -think- the (albiet, overly exaggerated) point is that if you only know zsh, you could potentially be at a disadvantage if you need to use someone else's terminal. Especially a remote server.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get your point. I use zsh+oh-my-zsh, and I don't know what Plan 9 is, don't code in D, never used LuaTeX (esp. not in Emacs), and I don't happen to wear a monocle. In fact I find zsh much easier for beginners and people who don't master the arcane intricacies of *nix.
I -think- the (albiet, overly exaggerated) point is that if you only know zsh, you could potentially be at a disadvantage if you need to use someone else's terminal. Especially a remote server.
I use bash as my everyday shell since 1996. I keep on reading the "how great zsh is" articles. And I always try zsh. But after a few minutes/hours, I go back to bash. It's really hard to change.
As a simple example, in bash if you use tab completion and there are multiple options, pressing tab again just reminds you that there are multiple options accompanied by a passive aggressive beep (it used to be this way at least). zsh lets you cycle through the possible completions.
I see your zsh and I raise you fish: http://ridiculousfish.com/shell/ Try it. It's better.
What's "better" about it?
Problem is zsh is not omnipresent like bash is. I'm sure that if you use zsh you also use Plan 9, code in D, write LuaTeX in Emacs and wear a monocle.
You should use different software or customizations when it's a good trade-off, not because everyone else is or isn't doing it.