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

Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

ridiculousfish.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 155 posts

Re: Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

#31

Post by ash »

icarus127 wrote: post #16
bstpierre wrote: post #11

They need to update the slogan? "A command line shell for the 90s" doesn't really draw me in. What I want to know: 1. In what specific ways is it better than zsh? 2. Is it absolutely, rock-solid stable?

I'm wondering about the answer to #1 as well. After trying this out for a bit there's nothing obvious and there are definitely things I miss.

1. No need to mess with configs. Works out of the box.

2. Breaking Bourne Shell compatibility. Personally I find Bourne syntax hard to learn and hard to read. Fish syntax is much better. [1, 2]

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_interactive_shell

[2]: http://ridiculousfish.com/shell/user_doc/html/index.html

Re: Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

#32

Post by buster »

Ahhh, finally. I used to use fish for many months, but after i figured that there is no development anymore, i switched back to bash...

Now it's time to change to fishfish and decide what's best suited for me! :)

edit: Also, i am disappointed that the ASCII-art fish on the frontpage is actually a picture and not ascii :(

Re: Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

#33

Post by nickpresta »

The package doesn't work on Debian testing/unstable/experimental: fish: /lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found (required by fish)

(I am running GLIB 2.13).

I tried compiling from source, but I am clearly missing dependencies. So far, I had to install:

libncurses5-dev, gettext, xsel, libxt-dev (alternatively, I could use --without-xsel and ignore these last two depends). You may want to add this to the project somewhere.

At any rate, I am looking forward to giving this a try.

Re: Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

#35

Post by fceccon »

pcsanwald wrote: post #30

Hard to tell from docs if fish has vi mode? vi mode is the main thing I love about bash.

Under missing features[1] you can find "Complete vi-mode key bindings", so I think it doesn't have it yet.

[1] http://ridiculousfish.com/shell/user_doc/html/index.html#tod...

Re: Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

#37

Post by archangel_one »

Paul_S wrote: post #20

This is missing the point of a shell by a mile. Extra features are nice. As an extra . Preferably on top of a rock solid platform that works everywhere, on everything, under any conditions. Same reason your PC boots in 16 bit real mode. I'm quite happy living in the 80s.

Isn't this entire shell an extra? I wouldn't replace bash with it, it seems more like a nicer interactive frontend but you could always drop down to bash if it didn't work for something. Sort of like KDE being a more fully-featured frontend to X, but you can drop back to Fluxbox if you want to test X without all the gizmos.

Re: Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

#38

Post by Symmetry »

amix wrote: post #34

When using auto-completion is there a way not to use arrow keys? Especially when completing a match it seems like I need to use the right arrow key. I would prefer not to use arrow keys at all, but use something like CTRL+(HJKL).

Well, the normal tab-based autocompletion works like you'd expect. You can go backwards in history the same way you do with the up arrow by using CTRL+P, and CTRL+N is the same as down arrow.

Re: Fish: Finally, a command line shell for the 90s

#39

Post by g3orge »

llambda wrote: post #17

I've been using the original fish[1] for years. I'm very biased, I love fish for many reasons and despite the claims that zsh can do the same things I've never had cause to switch from it. Now it was quite disappointing to see the original fish project seemingly halted. So this isn't simply great news, in the sense that development has been picked back up in the fishfish fork, some great improvements have been made a…

can zsh autocomplete man pages?
Post reply on HN