Nothings bad about it. I don't think it's strictly better or worse. Just
I get annoyed by differences with (Ba|Z)sh when I try Fish, but nushell is so much its own thing that it's fun.
Scrubbing through the video, this hurts my soul
echo $(echo $STRING | sed 's/World/Bash/')
For variables bash has PE forms:
echo ${STRING/World/Bash}
I miss these too much when I try Fish.
Zsh is still king in my book. Fish and Bash don't have the language features, and Zsh completion with menu groups is a premier experience. Fish's completion from manpages is very good, but there's also a standard zsh function to complete from --help output.
If I were to switch shells, it would have to be to nushell.
Steam has always had a Linux Runtime for that exact reason.
I've always considered it to be such that the whole thing is simultaneously a joke and true (haha jk, unless?), or maybe just hyperbole. But I've avoided using it myself because clearly it gets misinterpreted way too frequently
Not as cursed as
print("eovdedn"[n%2::2])
I don't fit into any of those categories.
Its obtuse, old, and doesn't have a lot of functionality of modern code editors
Obtuse? Yeah. The keyboard focus means natural discoverability is low. But I immediately preferred modal editing once I learned it.
Old? Eh, most people use Neovim nowadays and write plugins in lua. Even in OG Vim, Vim9script broke compatibility for a better dev experience.
Functionality? Out of the box, it is just a text editor. But only VSCode might have a more active plugin ecosystem. ALE has been a thing for ages if it's LSP support you're looking for.
It's not better, it's not worse, I'm not in any way superior for using it, but I love it for a reason.
Relevant except below, bolded is the key point.
-vprints non-printing characters in a visible representation. Making strange characters visible is a genuinely new function, for which no existing program is suitable. (sed -n l, the closest standard possibility, aborts when given very long input lines, which are more likely to occur in files containing non-printing characters.) So isn’t it appropriate to add the-voption tocatto make strange characters visible when a file is printed?
The answer is "No." Such a modification confuses what
cat’s job is concatenating files with what it happens to do in a common special case showing a file on the terminal. A UNIX program should do one thing well, and leave unrelated tasks to other programs. cat’s job is to collect the data in files. Programs that collect data shouldn’t change the data; cat therefore shouldn’t transform its input.
I think each of 3.8 through 3.11 were substantial, just in different ways.
Forcing stalemate if you're super down in material
I'm sure some of you have absolute monstrosities of sigils (I know I do, in my .zshrc alone). Post them without context, and try and guess what other users's lines are. If you want to provide context or guess, use the markdown editor to spoiler-tag your guesses and explanations!
Single quotes don't allow any escaping in shell, you need
Or, in Zsh with
setopt rcquotes: