Bash was the first language I learned, got pretty decent at it. Now what happens is I think of a tiny script I need to write, I start writing it in Bash, I have to do string manipulation, I say fuck this shit and rewrite in Python lol
this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
1551 points (99.0% liked)
Programmer Humor
21016 readers
1421 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
My google history hits for powershell for loop is is in the dozens.
The sad thing is that even chatgpt can't program in bash. I just want a simple script and every single time it just doesn't work. I always just end up saying "write this in python instead".
Python's usually the better choice anyway tbf. I know piping isn't as good, but there are so many footguns!
Nushell and Fish can be really convenient too.
I used to adhere to sh for an OpenBSD machine but I switched to python, Rust and Go for, even simple things.
Python is just as portable these days (on modern hardware, caveats, caveats).
Honestly so intuitive that I start there too unless I have a need for speed or distinct memory control. There's no job too small for a python script.
Meh. I had a bash job for 6 years. I couldn't forget it if I wanted to. I imagine most people don't use it enough for it to stick. You get good enough at it, and there's no need to reach for python.
I still have to look up the exact syntax of ifs and whiles.
I've coded in bash for a while
i used powershell, and even after trying every other shell and as a die hard Linux user I've considered going back to powershell cause damn man
I am a huge fan of using PowerShell for scripting on Linux. I use it a ton on Windows already and it allows me to write damn near cross-platform scripts with no extra effort. I still usually use a Bash or Fish shell but for scripting I love being able to utilize powershell.
Yeah. The best way to write any bash script is:
apt/yum install PowerShell; pwsh script.ps1
The older you get, the more things are like programming in bash.
Ever since I switched to Fish Shell, I've had no issues remembering anything. Ported my entire catalogue of custom scripts over to fish and everything became much cleaner. More legible, and less code to accomplish the same things. Easier argument parsing, control structures, everything. Much less error prone IMO.
Highly recommend it. It's obviously not POSIX or anything, but I find that the cost of installing fish on every machine I own is lower than maintaining POSIX-compliant scripts.
Enjoy your scripting!
I wish I could but since I use bash at work (often on embedded systems so no custom scripts or anything that isn't source code) I just don't want to go back and forth between the two.
Yeah, using one tool and then another one can be confusing at times. 😅
If you're going to write scripts that requires installing software, might as well use something like python though? Most Linux distros ship also ship with python installed
A shell script can be much more agile, potent, and concise, depending on the use case.
E.g. if you want to make a facade (wrapper) around a program, that's much cleaner in $SHELL. All you're doing is checking which keyword/command the user wanted, and then executing the commands associated with what you want to achieve, like maybe displaying a notification and updating a global environment variable or something.
Executing a bunch of commands and chaining their output together in python is surely much more cumbersome than just typing them out next to each other separated by a pipe character. It's higher-level. 👍
If it's just text in text out though, sure, mostly equivalent, but for me this is rarely the use case for a script.
I'm not anti bash or fish, I've written in both just this week, but if we're talking about readability/syntax as this post is about, and you want an alternative to bash, I'd say python is a more natural alternative. Fish syntax is still fairly ugly compared to most programming languages in my opinion.
Different strokes for different folks I suppose.
Fish syntax is still fairly ugly compared to most programming languages in my opinion.
subprocess.run(["fd", "-t", "d", "some_query"])
vs
fd -t d some_query
Which is cleaner? Not to mention if you want to take the output from the command and pipe it into another one.
It's not about folks with weird opinions or otherwise, it's about use cases. 🙂 I don't think python is any more "natural" than most other imperative languages.
Fish is probably even more natural, actually, due to it being more high level and the legibility of the script is basically dependent on the naming of the commands and options and variables used within it, rather than something else, just like python. They probably have similarly legible keywords. Fish I imagine has fewer, which is a good thing for legibility. A script does a lot more with a lot less, due to the commands themselves doing so much behind the scenes. There's a lot more boilerplate to a "proper" programming language than a scripting language.
But if you want to do something that python is better suited for, like advanced data processing or number crunching, or writing a whole application, then I would say that would be the better choice. It's not about preference for me when it comes to python vs fish, it's about the right tool for the job. But if we're talking about bash vs fish, then I'm picking fish purely by preference. 👍
I love fish but sadly it has no proper equivalent of set -e as far as I know.
; or return; in every line is not a solution.
It's the default on CachyOS and I've been enjoying it. I typically use zsh.
Yeah I also went bash -> zsh -> fish. Zsh was just too complicated to configure for my taste. Couldn't do it, apart from copy pasting stuff I didn't understand myself, and that just didn't sit right.
load more comments
(4 replies)
PSA: Run ShellCheck on your shell scripts. It turns up a shocking number of programming errors. https://www.shellcheck.net/
Thank you for this. About a year ago I came across ShellCheck thanks to a comment just like this on Reddit. I also happened to be getting towards the end of a project which included hundreds of lines of shell scripts across dozens of files.
It turns out that despite my workplace having done quite a bit of shell scripting for previous projects, no one had heard about Shell Check. We had been using similar analysis tools for other languages but nothing for shell scripts. As you say, it turned up a huge number of errors, including some pretty spicy ones when we first started using it. It was genuinely surprising to see how many unique and terrible ways the scripts could have failed.
load more comments
(4 replies)
to be honest I agree and thought we would be using something more intuitive by now
Everything is text! And different programs output in different styles. And certain programs can only read certain styles. And certain programs can only convert from some into others. And don't get me started on IFS.
I think the cool kids are using Nu now
No, Makefile syntax is more extreme.
Sure, but bash is more relatable, I think
I swapped from Make to Just: https://github.com/casey/just
Way better, IMO. Super simple logic, just as flexible.
load more comments
(1 replies)
every control structure should end in the backwards spelling of how they started
load more comments
(2 replies)
Regex
Edit: to everyone who responded, I use regex infrequently enough that the knowledge never really crystalizes. By the time I need it for this one thing again, I haven't touched it in like a year.
I just use the regex101 site. I don't need anything too complicated ever. Has all the common syntax and shows matches as you type. Supports the different languages and globals.
For me I spent one hour of ADHD hyper focusing to get the gist of regex. Python.org has good documentation. It’s been like 2 years so I’ve forgotten it too lol.
load more comments
(20 replies)
view more: next ›