fisher VS zsh-bench

You've got to install Fisher, then get z, sponge and a few others from the awsm.fish list.

Then you get trapped by the utility and struggle when you land on some remote server's bash shell.

https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher

https://github.com/jorgebucaran/awsm.fish#readme

If you're running a script, you can use edc/bass to run it from a fish shell. Fisher is one of the first things I install after fish, then bass, z and a few other helper plugins.

https://github.com/edc/bass

https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher

As a minimalist plugin manager for Fish, I recommend fisher. I've created a plugin that can be installed via fisher and integrated into any Fish environment. If there are any reasons why you don't want to use Fisher, you can just copy-paste conf.d/autoenv.fish file to your ~/.config/fish/conf.d directory.

Fish is a acronyn for friendly interactive shell. It is a smart and user friendly shell for Unix-like operating systems like Linux. There are a lot of features that make it stand out from other shells like bash. It has a lot of features like autosuggestions, syntax highlighting, tab completions and a lot more. You can read more about it in the documentation. I have been using it for a while now and I it configured to my liking. In terms of plugins I use fisher to manage my plugins. I have a couple of plugins that I use on a daily basis. I have listed them below:

stay away from Oh-My-Fish - you probably don’t need it - Fish is pretty awesome out of the box, and if you do want a plugin or two Fisher is a much better route.

Agreed. I personally like Fisher (https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher) with this theme based on Powerlevel10k (https://github.com/IlanCosman/tide)

Fisher is a simple and convenient plugin manager for Fish. With a single command, you can install new plugins, update them, or remove them, without ever having to change any file. Convenient! Therefore, I recommend to install it to simplify your plugin management.

You can install it quickly using fisher:

I use https://github.com/jorgebucaran/fisher

Someone's made a benchmarking system for zsh: https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench#premade-configs

Of course, their config is the best according to the benchmark (and ohmyzsh is the slowest option), but DIY configs are also covered, particularly possible performance optimizations.

Unfortunately, running exit is not a great strategy for running benchmarks. For zsh specifically, plugin managers are optimized for fast exit.

romkatv did a great write-up and benchmark within the context of zsh[0]. It's a great read.

[0] https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench#how-not-to-benchmark

Given the addition of async rendering in the latest release of spaceship, I wasn't sure whether I should include performance in the list of features found in powerlevel10kbut but not in spaceship. I used zsh-bench to benchmark powerlevel10k on my laptop running on battery (I'm writing this on a train) with a config that makes powerlevel10k looks similar to spaceship. I simply ran p10k configure and chose what looked most similar: Lean Style, UNICODE, 256 colors, two lines, etc. Here are the benchmark results:

Obligatory link since you are engaging in profiling interactive zsh: https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench.

1.) It's fast. Like, really fast. 1.) It supports deferred loading via zsh-defer 1.) It supports local plugins as well as ones hosted via a git provider (aka: GitHub, GitLab, BitBucket, etc) 1.) The codebase is simple and easy to understand and contribute to 1.) It supports git branches (with tag/shas on the roadmap) 1.) It supports partial plugin loading such as loading Oh-My-Zsh plugins and Prezto modules without loading the whole framework. 1.) There's an easy migration path from legacy plugin managers like Antigen/Antibody. 1.) Plugins are managed via a simple plugins file that makes it easy to share your config with others. 1.) And lots more

In any case, slow zsh startup is always caused by whatever you put in zsh startup files and it's always possible to reduce zsh startup to imperceptible levels without sacrificing any functionality by editing said startup files. There is a bit of info on interactive zsh performance at https://github.com/romkatv/zsh-bench.

Why is this a good thing? Is this a proxy for performance? If so, you can measure performance directly with zsh-bench. This way you can describe the advantage in terms that have real value to end users. For example, you can say that the first prompt appears N milliseconds faster when using Zpy than if you were using something-else.