[HN Gopher] Zshell
___________________________________________________________________
Zshell
Author : swatson741
Score : 29 points
Date : 2024-03-07 06:13 UTC (16 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.zsh.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.zsh.org)
| dmd wrote:
| Needs a (1990) tag. It always amuses me when people, to this day,
| say "eh, not going to use that newfangled zsh, bash was good
| enough for my forefathers and is good enough for me" - not
| realizing zsh was released less than a year after bash.
| alyandon wrote:
| I tried to give zsh a shot as a bash replacement but ultimately
| returned to bash.
|
| My main pain point was that zsh was really difficult to
| configure out of the box and a lot of the completions were much
| slower (cpu/wall time) than the equivalent completion in bash.
|
| I'm sure some of that was simply ignorance on my part.
| GuB-42 wrote:
| Bash improved a lot since the early 2000s, when I first
| assessed my options for shells and settled on zsh. As an
| interactive shell, zsh did more, and better, than any other
| shell I tried. Maybe it was slow, but not enough to matter at
| the time I used it.
|
| I guess that bash being the default practically everywhere
| nowadays made it so that it got a lot of love. For example,
| it is common to see command line tool come with bash
| completion files, less so with zsh.
|
| Also, while bash got better support where it matters, zsh
| mostly got bloat in the form of oh-my-zsh and the likes. You
| don't have to use it, but if you do, you tend to have all
| kinds of fancy stuff that affects performance. Also, if you
| want something fancy, you have fish now.
|
| I still use zsh (without oh-my-zsh) out of habit, but if I
| had to start over now, I would probably stay with bash, or
| maybe use fish, but not zsh.
| soraminazuki wrote:
| zsh has better completion, command line editing
| capabilities, and language features. It's not even close. I
| can port my bash configuration to zsh in mere minutes, but
| it's impossible to port my zsh configuration to bash. The
| reason is simple. Bash just lacks so many features.
|
| > For example, it is common to see command line tool come
| with bash completion files, less so with zsh.
|
| It's rare for bash to complete anything but filenames. zsh
| gives me subcommands and flags with descriptions.
|
| > Also, while bash got better support where it matters, zsh
| mostly got bloat in the form of oh-my-zsh and the likes.
|
| zsh is a well-maintained project. It makes no sense to
| ignore that and instead fault them for oh-my-zsh's
| shortcomings, as if it has anything to do with upstream
| zsh. zsh doesn't rely on oh-my-zsh for any of its features.
| ahartmetz wrote:
| I have had someone sing the praises of zsh, tried it, was
| like "that isn't so much better than bash" and went back.
| Then I heard about oh-my-zsh, tried zsh with oh-my-zsh, and
| stayed. I still think it's not a big deal, but it is an
| improvement.
| para_parolu wrote:
| Personally, I don't have a reason to move from bash. Bash, zsh,
| fish looks very similar to me. But they do have subtle
| differences that require learning. And I don't see a point.
| bombcar wrote:
| The only reason I moved to zsh is because I'm lazy, and macOS
| ships with it by default.
|
| Easier to change my other systems to zsh than fight it, but
| I've not really done anything different except some minor
| notices that it seems to autocomplete a tiny bit better (but
| that may be due to oh my zsh).
| tmtvl wrote:
| I like the path completion in zsh, being able to type ' _~
| /.c/x/x_', hit tab and have it autocomplete to ' _~
| /.config/xsettingsd/xsettingsd.conf_' is a lot nicer than ` _~
| /.c_', tab, tab, add an 'o', tab again, 'x', tab, tab, 's', tab,
| tab.
| cellwebb wrote:
| I've been using zsh for a while now and you just blew my mind!
| tmtvl wrote:
| Emacs' standard find-file function also does it, and I've
| since gotten so used to it that it's very irritating when I
| have to use a piece of software that doesn't complete like
| that.
| redder23 wrote:
| I also use zsh for years and did not know that. What I like
| this: Actually having completions shown in the screen and being
| able to navigate them with tabs. I think that is not a default
| behavior, but that is what oh-my-zsh does for you in its
| default setup. Does someone have more insight on that?
|
| I did not know about this, but I use
| https://github.com/wting/autojump, so I am not super sad that I
| missed something that hold me back severely. But good to know.
| tmtvl wrote:
| About the completions, that may be: autoload
| -Uz compinit compinit zstyle ':completion:*' menu
| select
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Huh, fish does this too, thanks!
| mdaniel wrote:
| happy 10000 day <https://xkcd.com/1053/> to you, I guess, or did
| its website change or something?
|
| although TIL they use _SourceForge_ for git. I 'm sure there' s a
| story there: https://sourceforge.net/p/zsh/code/ci/master/tree/
| kuczmama wrote:
| Somewhat related is "Oh My ZSH!" which is basically zsh on
| steroids, it's always one of the first things I install on a new
| computer. It gives things like new colors, themes, plugins, and
| more. Highly recommend you check it out.
|
| https://ohmyz.sh/
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-07 23:02 UTC)