[joseph]

I use bash and also have no patience for configuring tooling. Your fish dotfiles are more complicated than my bash ones. I used to work on a team where many of the other engineers used fish. I never saw it doing anything I couldn't do in bash, although it looked a little fancier. But the annoying thing was when they asked me for help, and none of the commands I gave them worked in fish. It made for very slow troubleshooting sessions.

[mcjiggerlog]

Fish has so many more features out of the box than bash. Once you use fish for a while it's really quite painful to go back to basic bash.

[em-bee]

i am using fish for more than a decade and i don't have any dotfiles for it. (do i win? :-p )

your commands to help not working in fish? that is rather surprising. i would think that fish users should be aware that shell specific things in fish are different, so they should have been able to cope and translate as needed.

and it's not what you can do in fish that makes it special. it's how you do it. the syntax coloring, the completions, the syntax itself...

the key thing for me is how it handles searching history and autosuggestions. i just learned how to somehow recreate this setup in zsh, and i am very curious if bash can do that too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37274207

btw i believe bash got a lot better at command completion after fish popularized the idea.

[lost_tourist]

Atuin or fzf is well worth adding to fish. I only add one of those (atuin these days) and a few custom scripts to make my life a bit easier.

[subjectsigma]

The couldn’t just open a bash shell? It’s not like installing fish removes bash from your system