Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by em-bee 1030 days ago
fish doesn't have builtins but all fish commands are external binaries or fish functions. i think at one point early in the history of fish those binaries may have been installed on the global path so they were accessible outside of fish and possibly there was a name conflict with one of them that this script triggered.

although such a name conflict should not have happened (and i can't think of which command such a script might have used that would also be a fish command), and the global path thing was also fixed soonish. but this is all a faint memory, so i am not sure i remember any of that right.
1 comments
pxc 1030 days ago
Fish definitely has builtins, for example

  - cd
  - source, .
  - eval
  - string
  - and
  - or
  - builtin
  - command
and many others.

Not sure what the point of distinguishing between fish builtins and fish functions is; whether a builtin is shipped as a function distributed with fish or a reserved word in the fish evaluator seems like an implementation detail.

link
em-bee 1029 days ago
fish has grown and evolved. i was referring to this:

Builtin commands should only be created when it cannot be avoided. echo, kill, printf and time are among the commands that fish does not implement internally since they can be provided as external commands. Several other commands that are commonly implemented as builtins and can not be implemented as external commands, including type, vared, pushd and popd are implemented as shellscript functions in fish.

if i remember correctly, this led to some useful commands that are builtin elsewhere to be external binaries shipped with fish. but since those where not actually tied to the fish shell they could run without it, and if they ended up on the global path be accessible from other shells.

the relevant text on the website has been changed, but it is referenced here:

https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/612

the discussion also points out that this has changed over time

link
pxc 1029 days ago
Idk if fish has ever shipped builtins that way, but doing so is pretty conventional and doesn't normally put those executables on the PATH. It's what libexec is for: https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs/ch04s07.htm...

If you wanna add a builtin like that to your own distribution of fish, you could do it cleanly by keeping those binaries in /usr/lib or /usr/libexec and then wrapping them in a fish function that ships in fish's install prefix. (This is basically how fish's Python scripts for generating completions from manpages are shipped today.)

link
em-bee 1029 days ago
doesn't normally put those executables on the PATH

right, i don't remember the details, but when it happened it was probably fixed quickly. could even have been a packaging error in a distribution.

link