Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | pmarreck's commentslogin

does mise use nix underneath or did you abandon nix entirely?

Mise doesn't use nix. I think the OP is stating he replaced nix with mise.

Would love this with Zig installed

Obviously the dependencies are way too heavy currently, but I do wonder long term if we'll have simple, highly portable zig compilers.

also. did you mean .inputrc ?

Yes, I meant ~/.inputrc .

The latter is XDG.

~/bin predates it.

And of course you can use both.


Have you met Bash? It’s a shrine to space-delimited everything lol

I reworded my comment for clarity now.

would an alias just work in this use-case?

Global aliases are a zsh feature and not avaliable in bash. So if you want:

  openssl ,v
to expand to...

  openssl --version
readline seems like the way to go.

Then again most of the examples OP gave are usually available as short options, and aliasing ,s to sudo is certainly possible. So the only one which makes sense to me is ,,=$. But it's probably not worth the trouble to my muscle memory.


> most of the examples OP gave are usually available as short options

Yes, but a lot of commands behave differently for -h and --help.

> aliasing ,s to sudo is certainly possible

Sure, but my ,s key sequence doesn’t just expand to sudo. It actually moves the cursor to the start of the current line, prefixes the command with sudo, and then moves the cursor to the end of the line. The idea is when you type a command which requires root privileges but forget to use sudo, you can just hit ctrl+p ,s to fetch the previous command and prefix it with sudo. This is what it looks like in ~/.inputrc: ",s":"^Asudo ^E"


I do the same thing, but I also have a command that shows me what functions or scripts might be shadowing other scripts

Care to share?

the sibling answer but with `-a` before command name, will display all path hits for a command.

  which <commandname>

Seemed like it was more than that, but the comment is ambiguous. I took it to mean "show me all the commands which are shadowed" not "is this command shadowed"...

nope, that just gets you the first hit, not all of them

type -a commandname


quite simple

type -a <commandname>


this. which(1) and whereis(1) are not bash, only an approximation or coincidence at best:

  $ type -a which
  which is /usr/bin/which
As a bash built-in, only the type command invokes the installed bash's code path to resolve command words:

  $ type -a type
  type is a shell builtin
  type is /usr/bin/type

  $ help type
  type: type [-afptP] name [name ...]
      Display information about command type.
    
      For each NAME, indicate how it would be interpreted if used as a
      command name.
    
      Options:
        -a  display all locations containing an executable named NAME;
            includes aliases, builtins, and functions, if and only if
            the `-p' option is not also used
        -f  suppress shell function lookup
        -P  force a PATH search for each NAME, even if it is an alias,
            builtin, or function, and returns the name of the disk file
            that would be executed
        -p  returns either the name of the disk file that would be executed,
            or nothing if `type -t NAME' would not return `file'
        -t  output a single word which is one of `alias', `keyword',
            `function', `builtin', `file' or `', if NAME is an alias,
            shell reserved word, shell function, shell builtin, disk file,
            or not found, respectively
    
      Arguments:
        NAME    Command name to be interpreted.
    
      Exit Status:
      Returns success if all of the NAMEs are found; fails if any are not found.

  $ $SHELL --version
  GNU bash, version 5.3.9(1)-release

August 5, 2026 is the date mentioned in this?

I put a note in my calendar!


nobody is going to care about your bespoke codework if there is no downstream measurable difference

I asked it about "Chinese cultural dishonesty" (such as the 2019 wallet experiment, but wait for it...) and it probably had the most fascinating and subtle explanation of it I've ever read. It was clearly informed by Chinese-language sources (which in this case was good... references to Confucianism etc.) and I have to say that this is the first time I feel more enlightened about what some Westerners may perceive as a real problem.

I wasn't logged in so I don't have the ability to link to the conversation but I'm exporting it for my records.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: