I see the value proposition of nushell. I'm wondering if I should also try fish.

May I ask if you switched to fish from zsh? What motivated your change?

Background: I invested some time not too long ago to read zsh docs in detail and customize my own configuration (e.g. instead of using oh-my-zsh). Since then, I've been quite happy with zsh. That said, I'm also open to switching to fish and/or nushell based on recommendations.

I didn’t switch from zsh, but from bash, to fish, primarily because bash was occasionally a bit clunky to use, and there were a lot of things that could be optimized in a modern environment. I settled on fish because it suited what I was looking for: an ergonomic shell that worked well out-of-the-box. Paired with strong community support, clean scripting syntax, and a wide ecosystem, it makes for a really enjoyable shell experience. I haven’t tried zsh, so I can’t compare the two.

I’m happy with fish, and I don’t see much benefit to switching to nu. nu is exceptionally good at one thing: working with data, but lacks features in other areas (auto-completion, scripting, etc.). With time, I can see these features being implemented, but I think they’ll be re-inventing the wheel in a lot of areas that other shells are already good at.

> what motivated your change?

didn't switch from zsh but bash, did it because wanted a bit more features at shell without additional configuration

How does it compare to fish shell (especially fish’s great autocompletion), e.g. why are you not switching completely?

nu is still in its infancy, and currently lacks critical features of other shells, which is why I haven’t switched completely.

As for the future, perhaps a bit brazen, but I’m confident that other shells will introduce the core feature of nu in the near future to stay competitive. I can see fish having a “||” operator and rewrites of a few gnu functions to achieve what nu does natively.