Fish shell 2.2

http://fishshell.com/?version=2.2

by siteshwar • 11 years ago

154 70 11 years ago

fishshell.com

voidz2• 11 years ago

Awesome! 90s, here I come!

Svenstaro• 11 years ago

In the 90s, you would have been hard-pressed to find a shell anywhere as good as fish.

ufo3• 11 years ago

Its a command line shell for the nineties, not from the nineties.

voidz2• 11 years ago

Downvotes? Come on, the 90s were fantastic. I haven't heard of Fish before but what I said was meant as a supportive pat on the shoulder; projects like these are great. So whoever's pressing the down button, please, try to crack a smile, or at least stop ruining mine.

brudgers• 11 years ago

Comments which add little or no value to the discussion are discouraged by HN community mores [edit: the "avoid me too comments" has been removed from the guidelines but habits die hard]. The reason is illustrated by this subthread: such comments often devolve into metadiscussion about behavior and complaints about community norms.

The up arrow expresses support for the story. The delete link allows a person to revoke comments that don't merit upvotes. The edit link lets comments to be modified with supporting details, examples, evidence and rationales that contribute to HN'ers understanding and knowledge by extending the content.

That's more constructive than complaining about downvotes and implying that people don't get it.

JupiterMoon3• 11 years ago

I think the downvotes are because you completely failed to grasp what Fish shell is. It is a newer more modern shell than bash not some type of retro 90's toy.

konceptz• 11 years ago

I've been using fish shell on osx for the last 3 years. It's fun and puts ctrl-r in front of my typing without being obtrusive. I'm glad to see it here.

err4nt2• 11 years ago

I use Fish shell on Ubuntu and OS X for basic stuff: file manipulation, using command-line apps, and occassionally doing some light shell scripting to automate my workflow.

Coming from BASH this shell feels like a much-needed update! Instead of worrying to make sure my terminal has all of these feature and then having a different experience in each terminal app - now All of the features are in shell not the terminal and I can connect anywhere, from any device, and enjoy the same setup.

The only two downsides are actually the same downside: its not compatible with BASH's shell scripting, which means you often cant just run shell scripts written by others, you may have to reformat it a little first. Same if true for how you format aliases and a few other shell-related stuff you put in your options file. It will still all work, but unless it's been ported to Fish's syntax it may need to be updated or rewritten.

This means that all of my scripted automation I have done is Fish-specific for now and wont run in regular BASH.

TimWolla• 11 years ago

its not compatible with BASH's shell scripting, which means you often cant just run shell scripts written by others, you may have to reformat it a little first.

What exactly do you mean by “Shell scripts”? If the script contains a proper Shebang you can easily run it via `./script.sh`. If not you use: `bash ./script.sh`.

lqdc13• 11 years ago

He probably means that it's not backwards compatible with bash, so you have to make it a fish script to run it as fish script.

ufo3• 11 years ago

The biggest problem I have is scripts that are meant to be exec-ed from the interactive shell. For example, scripts that set environment variables and change the current directory.

keedot4• 11 years ago

I have several bash functions that need to be sourced to be included. For instance, I use `cdc` to change to my code directory, where I keep my source for projects I am working on. If I type `cdc name` it changes it to my projects source directory, save me a lot of keystrokes in a day as I have many that I flip between. This sourcing of a function is required due to the way cd is handled, and in it's current form, not directly usable under fish. Maybe it's easier under fish, but fish isn't backwards compatible to make this work out of the box.

Revell• 11 years ago

My main gripe with a shell like Fish is that it won't work with the trusted ol' BASH scripts. Seeing as I deal with quite some BASH scripts on a day-to-day basis at work this keeps me from trying it out, even though I'd love to be able to use something more sophisticated/evolved than plain BASH.

omtose• 11 years ago

How come your scripts don't work with #!/bin/bash ?

markab21• 11 years ago

Yeah, I keep seeing this complaint come up. Interesting that so many people don't realize you can run bash scripts from another shell without fanfare.

keedot4• 11 years ago

Because we don't always source a shell script, you may need to source functions for certain functionality to work.

tachion• 11 years ago

My main gripe with 'BASH scripts' is that in most cases they could simply be 'Shell scripts' and in most cases they call and require Bash for no reason at all ;)

TorKlingberg• 11 years ago

I guess most people cannot be bothered to remember which features are bash specific and which will work in any /bin/sh. I don't think there is such a thing as a generic "shell script", csh has completely different syntax.

Symmetry• 11 years ago

What I do is configure my terminal emulators to use fish but leave bash as my system shell.

kolev7• 11 years ago

Awesome! Remove the built-in web server and count me in!

lcnmrn• 11 years ago

The built-in web server is optional anyway.

kolev7• 11 years ago

Via configuration, but it's bundled into the code. I'd rather have the web server as an optional install.

iagooar• 11 years ago

What's the issue with the web server?

JupiterMoon3• 11 years ago

Some people might think that it might represent an extra volume of code for bugs to creep in - and hence security issues?

ytjohn• 11 years ago

The web server is only active if you run the command fish_config. When you run this command, if finds the next available port, starting at localhost:8000 and opens a web browser pointing to that port.

Once in the web interface, you can click around to implement some pre-supplied recipies to your fish configuration.

If you hit ctrl-c, the fish_config program exits and stops listening on the port.

It's something you either run or you don't.

x5n1• 11 years ago

i used fish 10 years ago. since then i use zsh. i am happy with zsh. but fish is a good shell. incredible it's still being developed.

ufo3• 11 years ago

Not so sure about the "still". There was a fork and a change of developers somewhere along those 10 years.

StavrosK2• 11 years ago

I use fish exclusively and swear by it. I switched to zsh some years ago and enabled fish emulation, but it was slower, and I realized all I was doing was using fish by proxy, so I switched back to fish.

It's fantastic, I urge everyone to give it a try. Pretty much the only valid complaint I see here is from people who have bash code that needs to be sourced to run. I definitely think that it's worth rewriting some code to switch to a much superior shell, though.

qznc3• 11 years ago

Ack.

If I need to source, a quick "bash<enter>" drops me back to bash. This is good enough for me.

jonotime2• 11 years ago

Fish shell is awesome. But yes, compatibility of sourced functions was a bit of a problem for me. After about a year with it, I switched back to zsh. With a couple plugins I was able to get much of the fish features out it, while keeping the bash compatibility. Here is how I do it.

Install oh-my-zsh, and enable I couple plugins. Here's what I have in my config: plugins=(git history-substring-search zsh-syntax-highlighting docker sudo)

In terms of 'enjoying the same setup on all devices', I use dropbox (or owncloud), to sync my config. All I have to do is add this at the bottom of my .zshrc file: source ~/Dropbox/global.zshrc

My last tip about directory jumping, for keedot, is there are methods that will do this for you. I use fasd (https://github.com/clvv/fasd) which you can add to your shell and will remember the directories you use often so you dont have to make special cases for specific ones. Check out the 'z' command. It has been amazingly useful.

vially• 11 years ago

I can't seem to find a changelog but I suppose this release should include vi-mode? Can't wait to try it out.

tyilo• 11 years ago

Here's the release notes: http://fishshell.com/release_notes.html

hartator• 11 years ago

How does it compare to zsh (more specialy the package o-my-zsh)? The only thing that catch my eyes was the shell command being completed automatically in grey in the background. That will be great to have this in zsh.

flyrain• 11 years ago

That's right. Auto completion is really cool. I wish zsh and bash have it.

jonotime2• 11 years ago

there are several zsh autocomplete type plugins. I like this one https://github.com/zsh-users/zsh-history-substring-search

johntash• 11 years ago

You might be interested in oh-my-fish which tries to be pretty similar to oh-my-zsh, including an optional theme that matches the default zsh theme. I'd definitely recommend it.

https://github.com/oh-my-fish/oh-my-fish

rf3000• 11 years ago

Fish is probably my favorite shell after having worked with csh, bash, and zsh. But I have to use RVM at work, and it's a real bummer that RVM and Fish don't play nice with each other. I know rbenv works great with Fish, but I'm stuck with RVM at work. So using zsh as a second choice for now.

threatofrain• 11 years ago

I'd like to use Fish more, but my biggest worry is that many tools don't come with instructions or support for Fish. I think that means you have to be committed to learning a lot about Fish, or use two shells?

qznc3• 11 years ago

I use fish primarily. Once in a while I drop into bash. For example, one tool requires me to "source environment.sh" (similar to virtualenv) and this cannot be done in fish.

Fish shell 2.2

Related Stories