Note that skim performs worse than fzf. There’s a new matcher in Rust called nucleo which is faster, but it currently doesn’t have a cli and can only be used inside Helix editor (hx)
nu is probably the best shell for ad-hoc data processing, handling all my daily needs in one expression.
fd and rg have another thing in common, that they’re both 50% shorter than their traditional alternatives /s
fd is pretty cool. It offers a good simplification over find’s syntax. find -name "*file*" vs fd file. rg I don’t use often except for colorized output. A lot of Nvim plugins also prefer to use ripgrep over grep.
nu is probably the best shell for ad-hoc data processing, handling all my daily needs in one expression.
I am really struggling with this, I heard about nu shell some time ago, but the fact that you had to learn some form of new language made me reluctant to actually try it.
As a fisher user I want to have sane usable defaults, without having to learn just another programming language for a “tool”.
I use fish for simple command pipelines as well. But traditional shells are not as good when I need to do anything “structured”, because they treats almost any value as a string and don’t have anonymous functions. The first problem means that you have to parse a string again and again to do anything useful, the second means that when both pipe and xargs fails you are doomed.
Nu solves both of the big problems that matters when you want to do rather complex but ad-hoc processing of data. And with a rather principled design, nu is very easy to learn (fish is already way better than something POSIX like bash though).
Personally another important reason is that I have a Windows machine at work and nushell is much easier than pwsh.
Btw fish is also going to be a “tool in rust” soon :)
Note that
skimperforms worse thanfzf. There’s a new matcher in Rust callednucleowhich is faster, but it currently doesn’t have a cli and can only be used inside Helix editor (hx)nuis probably the best shell for ad-hoc data processing, handling all my daily needs in one expression.fdandrghave another thing in common, that they’re both 50% shorter than their traditional alternatives /sfdis pretty cool. It offers a good simplification overfind’s syntax.find -name "*file*"vsfd file.rgI don’t use often except for colorized output. A lot of Nvim plugins also prefer to use ripgrep over grep.I am really struggling with this, I heard about nu shell some time ago, but the fact that you had to learn some form of new language made me reluctant to actually try it. As a fisher user I want to have sane usable defaults, without having to learn just another programming language for a “tool”.
What am I missing?
It kinda fills a niche.
I use fish for simple command pipelines as well. But traditional shells are not as good when I need to do anything “structured”, because they treats almost any value as a string and don’t have anonymous functions. The first problem means that you have to parse a string again and again to do anything useful, the second means that when both pipe and
xargsfails you are doomed.Nu solves both of the big problems that matters when you want to do rather complex but ad-hoc processing of data. And with a rather principled design, nu is very easy to learn (fish is already way better than something POSIX like bash though).
Personally another important reason is that I have a Windows machine at work and nushell is much easier than pwsh.
Btw fish is also going to be a “tool in rust” soon :)