News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Fish shell 2.2 by lqdc13 on Sunday July 12, 2015 @09:06AM (#9873361)
He probably means that it's not backwards compatible with bash, so you have to make it a fish script to run it as fish script.
Re:Fish shell 2.2 by chopman on Sunday July 12, 2015 @09:09AM (#9873370)
But do you need to? Just write it for bash and run it from fish the same way you run python scripts from bash.
Re:Fish shell 2.2 by s_kilk on Sunday July 12, 2015 @09:16AM (#9873389)
It seems a lot of people don't realize `bash`, `sh`, `zsh` etc... are executable binaries just like any other on the system, and that you don't need to be logged in to a bash shell to run bash scripts.
Re:Fish shell 2.2 by arthulia on Sunday July 12, 2015 @01:24PM (#9874158)
This isn't the case for sourced scripts. Running a script in bash from fish that changes your current directory will do one of two things: It'll move you to that directory but inside of a bash shell, or it will move you to that directory in a bash shell, bash's cd will return, and you'll be in the same directory as before, still in the fish shell.
Re:Fish shell 2.2 by Debilski on Sunday July 12, 2015 @09:22AM (#9873401)
The problem is that some scripts are written to be `source`d.
Re:Fish shell 2.2 by err4nt on Monday July 13, 2015 @06:14PM (#9881517)
I'm no CLI wizard, so when I sit down to make my own function or alias I'm going to be googling how to do it whether it's for Bash or Fish.

What I meant in my comment above is a lot of 'download an install' instructions in tutorials, and sometimes installation wizards for programs are written for bash, and can't be run without modification in Fish. Not a major setback, but for a Bash user it would just work.