I feel that more succinct and quicker to write does not mean simpler.
Fish tries to have a cleaner syntax and probably succeeds in doing so. It may even be an attempt to bring some change to the status quo that is the POSIX shell syntax.
I didn't try to fish anyway, because I like to not have to think about translating when following some tutorial or procedure on the Web. Zsh just works for that, except in a few very specific situations (for a long time, you could not just copy paste lines from SSH warnings to remove known hosts, but this has been fixed recently by adding quotes).
> I feel that more succinct and quicker to write does not mean simpler.
Indeed, it does not. They're design trade-offs of each other.
> Fish tries to have a cleaner syntax and probably succeeds in doing so. It may even be an attempt to bring some change to the status quo that is the POSIX shell syntax.
Indeed, it does, and it is (attempting to, though maybe not doing).
The thing is that, for shell languages, which are intended to be used more interactively for one-off things than for large scripting, I think being more succinct and quicker to write are more valuable qualities than being simpler.
Fish tries to have a cleaner syntax and probably succeeds in doing so. It may even be an attempt to bring some change to the status quo that is the POSIX shell syntax.
I didn't try to fish anyway, because I like to not have to think about translating when following some tutorial or procedure on the Web. Zsh just works for that, except in a few very specific situations (for a long time, you could not just copy paste lines from SSH warnings to remove known hosts, but this has been fixed recently by adding quotes).