[JdeBP]

One cannot infer the behaviour of the Windows Subsystem for Linux from the behaviour of Cygwin. The two are quite different things.

You're also being misled by the misleading "Bash on Windows" marketing name. It's not bash, even primarily. It's a "personality" subsystem for running Linux binaries on top of the Windows NT kernel. And that's what jiantastic is asking about: whether the subsystem, with what Linux programs it can run and what limitations it has, is "good enough" as a development environment, which includes considering everything from running compilers to hosting test rigs. Xe is not asking whether the Bourne Again shell is better than some other command interpreter.