OC by @[email protected]

I’ve been trying nushell and words fail me. It’s like it was made for actual humans to use! 🤯 🤯 🤯

It even repeats the column headers at the end of the table if the output takes more than your screen…

Trying to think of how to do the same thing with awk/grep/sort/whatever is giving me a headache. Actually just thinking about awk is giving me a headache. I think I might be allergic.

I’m really curious, what’s your favorite shell? Have you tried other shells than your distro’s default one? Are you an awk wizard or do you run away very fast whenever it’s mentioned?

  • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    1·
    20 minutes ago

    Neat. After reading the docs for a bit, it seemed like the sort of shell that would be made by Rust programmers. What do you know, that guess is correct.

  • cosmicrose@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    2·
    2 hours ago

    Nushell is so cool! I’m happy it’s still progressing; I was worried it would die out because it’s such a leap from existing shells that they kinda need to develop an ecosystem from scratch. Piping actual data tables between commands is brilliant. I’ve tried using it as a daily driver but it takes some work to convert existing dot files and scripts. I might try it again.

  • ORbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    4·
    2 hours ago

    Uh, this is dumb. I installed it and did a few things I would do on a normal basis. You’re telling me that this is not supported? It’s absolutely insane.

    • Oinks@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      4·
      2 hours ago

      Nu’s find builtin isn’t a GNU find repacement. I think what you actually want is ls piped into where:

      ls **/* | where type == file

      I do question the choice to alias a well-known program with a builtin that does something entirely different. You can also use ^find to avoid calling the builtin. I would’ve expected \find (bash-like) or command find (fish-like) to work as well, but alas…

      • ORbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        4·
        2 hours ago

        I don’t think that’s what I’d actually want, no. I want GNU find functionality for this to be a viable shell replacement. It’s… neat, but it’s no daily driver.

        back to /bin/zsh for me!

        • chrash0@lemmy.world
          1·
          1 hour ago

          you can absolutely do what you want. GNU find is external and since it conflicts with a builtin can be aliased or referenced like ^find.

          the syntax is new for sure, and it’s not for everyone.

          been daily driving for over a year

          • ORbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            1·
            1 hour ago

            I prefer flow to futz. Thanks for the info. Glad it’s working for you. I’m staying with what works well for me.

        • cosmicrose@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          1·
          2 hours ago

          They kinda have to replace some coreutils like find from scratch to be compatible with their philosophy of piping data tables instead of text. It’s super cool and ends up being really powerful but yeah it’s a whole new ecosystem which makes it pretty much impossible to be a drop-in shell replacement.

      • ORbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        1·
        2 hours ago

        not my jam, but I appreciate that. I used to do ‘find ./ | grep -i string’ forever. I’ve come to prefer the more robust usage of ‘find’ these days, -type, -iname, etc.