News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Fish shell 3.0. Parent comment

Re:Fish shell 3.0 by StavrosK on Friday December 28, 2018 @02:30PM (#18778860)
The fact that it doesn't support your particular preferred syntax doesn't mean it's not production-ready.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fish shell 3.0 by jhardy54 on Friday December 28, 2018 @03:17PM (#18779134)
> your particular preferred syntax

I think it's called POSIX.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fish shell 3.0 by StavrosK on Friday December 28, 2018 @03:21PM (#18779155)
You seem to be making some sort of argument, I just don't know what it is. Are you saying that fish is not production ready because it's not POSIX-compatible?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fish shell 3.0 by yoklov on Saturday December 29, 2018 @12:08AM (#18781981)
It's still not POSIX compatible, deliberately.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fish shell 3.0 by pstadler on Friday December 28, 2018 @05:20PM (#18779939)
I‘m not switching to fish because of its lack of POSIX compliancy. This is a valid complaint.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Fish shell 3.0 by faho on Friday December 28, 2018 @05:25PM (#18779975)
It is!

But calling it "getting closer to production readiness" feels a tad insulting.

It's probably just a bit of snark, so it's not worth getting up in arms about, but it's not really friendly phrasing.

[ Parent | on HN ]