On May 30, 2012, at 1:17 PM, Maxim Gonchar wrote:
> Hi,
> Thank you for you the answers.
>
>> 2. Yes, "implicit cd" is gone. I found it to be too easy to accidentally
>> invoke.
> That's pity. Can this feature be switchable?
> I'm sorry for being bothering. It would be painful to learn it back again (:
Do you use implicit cd in general, or only for '..'?
>
>> 4. I think fish is doing the right thing with "false ; and sdlkfjsdklf".
>> That semicolon means that the 'and' is the beginning of a new statement, and
>> fish agrees with other shells (including fish trunk) that this is an error.
>> Remove the semicolon ("false and sdlkfjdsklf") and it does not error.
> This statement confronts all my fish experience. I use fish as default shell
> for the long time.
> What about "echo 123 and echo 234" and "echo 123; and echo 234"?
You're completely right. What I wrote before about the semicolon was nonsense.
I think this behavior is not new. When I try your command "false ; and
sdlkfjsdklf" on a trunk fish build, it shows an error. Perhaps you have a
function installed that suppresses it.
Anyways I agree it should not show an error in this case. I filed
https://github.com/ridiculousfish/fishfish/issues/20
>
>
>> 5. What you're seeing is the "internalized scripts" behavior, where at build
>> time, fish compiles all the default functions into itself (as C strings).
>> This reduces the number of files touched at launch. I did this under the
>> belief that these functions generally depended on each other, and ought not
>> to be modified. However, since this is causing problems, we should restrict
>> the functions internalized in this way, or eliminate the optimization
>> altogether. I filed https://github.com/ridiculousfish/fishfish/issues/15
>>
>> Can you share which functions from /usr/local/share/fish/ you override?
> fish_prompt is what I see from the beginning.
> As an example I've tried to override 'll'.
>
>> (The fish_prompt case is particularly bad - I didn't realize the effect that
>> would have. I put my prompt in config.fish)
> I would prefer to have a possibility to override any function, even
> internalized.
> Sometimes it's very useful, especially for debugging.
>
> And from the usage point of view, it is more clean when there are no implicit
> limitations.
Ok, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I'll investigate how much this
optimization is actually buying us and then we'll consider what to do about it.
_fish
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Fish-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
