Our last apartment had a microwave that insisted that the off/cancel button was ONLY for the microwave part and NOT the timer part, and if you tried to use it to turn off the timer, would display a message saying “push timer button to turn timer off” (or smth to that effect). I found it infuriating. I told my wife, “if they can program it to sass me, they can program it to turn the damn timer off.”
No, I’m really happy with fish in general and use its syntax. The only times are things like e.g. a coworker sending me a 3-line script and then not being able to just copy, paste, enter.
I just wish my local restaurant would accept burger orders in addition.
Like, if you can warn me that “this is a Chinese noodle restaurant, we don’t do burger here. Order one of these instead!” then you could also just, you know, make me a burger!
No, it’d be like, when you asked them do you know what a burger is? They pointed at a picture of a burger on the wall (they put this picture on the wall because for whatever reason people kept asking them to make burgers), and told you, of course we know what a burger is, we don’t make them, now order noodles or get out!
Okay, you know what… That’s actually better than what I said. Defeat acknowledged.
(However, it still seems a bit silly to me. name="value" will prompt you to enter set name "value", with your exact name/value prefilled. As far as I know, it really is just syntax substitution; or am I wrong here? Are there semantic differences that can’t be translated?)
i think it could be a slippery slope thing. things like name="value" are easy to parse and implement, but then what if people keep asking for a little bit more, and a little bit more again? bash’s syntax is very very complex, there will be no winners if fish has a half-assed implementation of what bash does, it’s better to not even start.
I just wish fish would accept standard bash syntax in addition.
Like, if you can warn me that “this is not how we set vars in fish, do this instead!” then you could also just, you know, do it.
Our last apartment had a microwave that insisted that the off/cancel button was ONLY for the microwave part and NOT the timer part, and if you tried to use it to turn off the timer, would display a message saying “push timer button to turn timer off” (or smth to that effect). I found it infuriating. I told my wife, “if they can program it to sass me, they can program it to turn the damn timer off.”
Anyway. I get it.
yea but the posix sh set syntax is atrocious so not supporting it is doing you a favor
It’s Stockholm syndrome
I mean who doesn’t like putting mandatory quotes around all variables (though exceptions, like in
[[ ... ]], apply)?Or keywords like
fiandesacor worrying about $IFSfi and esac but not rof or elihw
smh my head
No od either
bash could really have improved things by giving us noitcnuf.
I support this amendment.
But it’s so clever!
So you want to bash fish like some kind of sicko?
No, I’m really happy with fish in general and use its syntax. The only times are things like e.g. a coworker sending me a 3-line script and then not being able to just copy, paste, enter.
Is joke
I just wish my local restaurant would accept burger orders in addition.
Like, if you can warn me that “this is a Chinese noodle restaurant, we don’t do burger here. Order one of these instead!” then you could also just, you know, make me a burger!
That analogy only holds if they cook the burger for you, hold it in front of you, and go “we don’t make this”, then throwing it out
No, it’d be like, when you asked them do you know what a burger is? They pointed at a picture of a burger on the wall (they put this picture on the wall because for whatever reason people kept asking them to make burgers), and told you, of course we know what a burger is, we don’t make them, now order noodles or get out!
Okay, you know what… That’s actually better than what I said. Defeat acknowledged.
(However, it still seems a bit silly to me.
name="value"will prompt you to enterset name "value", with your exact name/value prefilled. As far as I know, it really is just syntax substitution; or am I wrong here? Are there semantic differences that can’t be translated?)i think it could be a slippery slope thing. things like
name="value"are easy to parse and implement, but then what if people keep asking for a little bit more, and a little bit more again? bash’s syntax is very very complex, there will be no winners if fish has a half-assed implementation of what bash does, it’s better to not even start.you, I like you. Let’s bang!