I used zsh a long time ago when I was a student. It was more user-friendly than bash.
But as I didn't use since more than 15 years, I couldn't say more about the comparison with fish.
Recently I've installed zsh + oh-my-zsh as a POSIX alternative to fish, but it seems that many native features of fish (auto-completion, coloration, ...) have to be configured manually in zsh (through plugins or conf file).
Actually I don't like autocompletion. It can reveal far too much when you are for example showing something for larger audience ;) So having that built-in in fish does not count for me as better. But I guess I'll give it another shot some time soon.
I get your point :)
But the real strength of fish is its ability to auto-complete commands and sub-commands, for example for git (branch , docker stop , ...). It's really powerful !
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I used zsh a long time ago when I was a student. It was more user-friendly than bash.
But as I didn't use since more than 15 years, I couldn't say more about the comparison with fish.
Recently I've installed zsh + oh-my-zsh as a POSIX alternative to fish, but it seems that many native features of fish (auto-completion, coloration, ...) have to be configured manually in zsh (through plugins or conf file).
Fish works great out of the box!
Actually I don't like autocompletion. It can reveal far too much when you are for example showing something for larger audience ;) So having that built-in in fish does not count for me as better. But I guess I'll give it another shot some time soon.
I get your point :)
But the real strength of fish is its ability to auto-complete commands and sub-commands, for example for git (branch , docker stop , ...). It's really powerful !