* paul: > fish does indeed not have the […]-globs.
So it's not just a lack of search-fu. Bummer. > I didn't even know Bash had those, and tbh I'm not convinced they are > that useful, since they only match one char. They have frequently proven useful to me. For more complex tasks awk, find, sed, xargs et al exist, but as "rm [b-k]*" shows, Bash globbing can be enough. > The only fish-native commands that supports regex is `string`, so the > shortest fish-only equivalent would probably be > `rm (string match -r '^[b-k].*' *)` This has been suggested to me off-list as well. At least "string" is a fish builtin, but it still feels too elaborate. "find -regex ..." would work, but like I wrote, I'd rather avoid using additional commands if simpler options exist. Well, if that's a known fish weakness, I'll have to live with it. Fish has many strengths to make up for it. I mostly wanted to rule out having missed some obvious solution. -Ralph _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
