oursh VS fish-shell

There is also https://github.com/nixpulvis/oursh which wants to be POSIX compatible with its own extensions. Actually I would prefer if a new shell focuses on bash compatibility.

If features are integrated, then I would probably want to have something about error handling because it is difficult to get right in bash even with shellcheck¹ and gets just worse when things run in parallel.

¹ https://www.shellcheck.net/

A lot of this has to do with the integration between the Terminal and the Shell. A project that came up recently that seems to take on a few of the issues is https://blog.warp.dev/how-warp-works. I've been meaning to write up a proper critique of this project at some point, but I keep getting side-tracked.

I also want a replacement for `fish`, however it's a pretty tall order to implement what I have in mind, and I got a bit stuck trying to find the right abstractions for background job management in Rust (there's a lot going on). But I genuinely believe a multi-language shell with POSIX support will finally allow us to move forward in the terminal environment. UI/UX issues like ctrl-c, window management, and everything else can be implemented as derivations from POSIX, or additions.

While somewhat tangential to the main thread of this post, I'll still leave my (incomplete) shell here for anyone who's interested. https://github.com/nixpulvis/oursh. The README has a decent description of features I want off the bat, and there's a bunch of design level issues in the tracker.

I'll never accept the death of the Terminal environment.

Reminds of the note at the bottom of Fish's releases. It's there because the build system cannot determine the current version for some reason. Hopefully that will go away now that they have switched to a different language / build system. The custom tarball is used by Arch Linux at the very least.

https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/releases/tag/3.7.1

https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/7772#issueco...

https://gitlab.archlinux.org/archlinux/packaging/packages/fi...

A recent practical example of the former: the fish shell re-wrote incrementally from C++ to Rust, and is almost finished https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/discussions/10123

An example of the latter: c2rust, which is a work in progress but is very impressive https://github.com/immunant/c2rust

It currently translates into unsafe Rust, but the strategy is to separate the "compile C to unsafe Rust" steps and the "compile unsafe Rust to safe Rust" steps. As I see it, as it makes the overall task simpler, allows for more user freedom, and makes the latter potentially useful even for non-transpiled code. https://immunant.com/blog/2023/03/lifting/

And this discussion from November has an update on the progress: https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/discussions/10123

We're using bash as our terminal shell for now (it is standard in many distros) but it is not the only one out there. If you want to test out zsh, fish or oh-my-zsh, you will see that there are a few differences and the features are usually the main differentiator. Try that, poke around.

They have a variety of reasons to move to rust, as outlined in their original rust discussion[1]. Mostly around finding other contributors, and adding an async/parallel mode they're comfortable with.

[1] https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/pull/9512