Talk:Fish (Unix shell)

How to structure the article
How about these main headlines: Design principles would be very short, whereas the latter two would have subsections, divided thematically, approximately like the comment grouping in today's Translation table section. The current Syntax section's comments would be converted to prose. I feel this text could also say something about the problems it solves, or refer back to relevant design principles. The translation table would be chopped into tables in each subsection, with the comment column merged into the prose. 84.209.119.158 (talk) 23:18, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
 * design principles
 * interactivity
 * syntax differences from POSIX

Handy cheatsheet
https://www.cheatography.com/myounkin/cheat-sheets/fish-shell/ covers a lot of the functionality concisely. II | (t - c) 09:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 3 September 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Moved to "Fish (Unix shell)" as suggested below. -- Calidum 19:26, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Friendly interactive shell → fish shell – I looked on the fish website and nowhere did it refer to it as "Friendly interactive shell." That is what the name stands for but it is not what it is commonly referred to as. When the shell starts up it prints "Welcome to fish, the friendly interactive shell," but that is more of a description than the name of fish. Merlin04talkcontribs 18:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Support but prefer Fish (shell) Fish (Unix shell). Is it's name (and also the clear WP:COMMONNAME). – Thjarkur (talk) 20:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, that may be confusing, since a non-techie would expect "Fish (shell)" to be the same as "shellfish". On the other hand, the Fish shell redirect has been there since 2009.  If we do go with "Fish (shell)" we will need to use for or similar hatnotes for people looking for an article about sea-dwelling creatures.  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  20:21, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it's more likely to be meaningless rather than confusing, but an even clearer title would be Fish (Unix shell), similar to the title of Bash (Unix shell). – Thjarkur (talk) 20:30, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, shellname (Unix shell) seems like good pattern to follow when the more-often-used shellname shell is problematic. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  20:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Fish (Unix shell). "Fish shell" is confusing, misrecognizable, and jargon.  Jargon subverting commonwords should not be supported in titles.  Fish (Unix shell) matches best to Unix shell. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:30, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose "fish shell", since that should be about some sort of aquatic fish life topic or shellfish. -- 65.94.170.98 (talk) 07:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Fish (Unix shell). Having "shell" as a WP:NATURALDIS is a a symptom of RAS syndrome. 94.21.78.115 (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)