
The fish shell is awesome - nikbackm
https://jvns.ca/blog/2017/04/23/the-fish-shell-is-awesome/
======
asrp
I switched to fish a bit more than a year ago. I used to have a script with
shorthands of frequently used long commands because I just couldn't get to
them easily enough with bash's ctrl+r.

Now with fish, I don't need that anymore. Pressing up a few times always gets
what I need and I don't need to come up with names for shorthands. (If I
really want to name it, I can always add a # "tag" at the end. A trick I
picked up from one of the post here (I can't remember which one).)

Although sometimes I do wish there was a keyword search feature treating space
as a separator for what I've already typed. One frequent case is when I'm
looking for `rsync --bunch --of --options user@server:path other_path`. I
remember `rsync` and I remember `user@server` (or one of the two paths) but
not the rest (and I also ssh, sftp, scp, etc to the same place a lot).

------
bkudria
Zsh can do all of these things without too much configuration, but Fish is
still missing my favorite Zsh feature: `push-line-or-edit`:
[https://nathangrigg.com/2014/04/zsh-push-line-or-
edit](https://nathangrigg.com/2014/04/zsh-push-line-or-edit)

------
mixedCase
Personally, if POSIX compliance wasn't mandatory I'd go one step further and
go with Xonsh, which offers more tangible benefits.

As it is, I can add a couple of plugins to zsh with zgen and get most of what
makes fish interesting. They're great ideas, but there's no need to sacrifice
so much for them.

------
moondev
Incompatible with bash which is ubiquitous. I much prefer zsh which can do
everything fish can

