Comparison of Bash, Elvish, NuShell, Murex, es-shell, fish, xonsh, PowerShell, Oil and Ion shells

comparison-of-shells.md

Comparison of Bash, Elvish, NuShell, Murex, es-shell, fish, xonsh, PowerShell, Oils (Oil/OSH/YSH) and Ion shells

(Originally generated by ChatGPT and reviewed/edited by Claude; now corrected/expanded based on reader feedback. YMMV.)

(generated by chatgpt 4o and reviewed/edited by claude 3.5 sonnet, YMMV)

Feature	Bash	Elvish	NuShell	Murex	es-shell	Fish	Xonsh	PowerShell	Oil	Ion
Language Paradigm	Imperative, procedural	Functional, with built-in data structures	Structured, pipeline-based, table-oriented	Hybrid (Shell + Programming Language)	Functional, with higher-order functions	Imperative, with focus on user-friendliness	Python-based, multi-paradigm	Object-oriented, imperative	Bash-compatible with modern language features	Rust-inspired, focusing on performance
Syntax	Traditional Unix shell syntax, can be cryptic	Pythonic, with Lisp-like elements	Custom syntax, resembling a mix of shell and Rust	Shell-like syntax with additional programming features	Simple, functional syntax inspired by RC and Plan 9 shell	Fish-specific, designed for readability	Python syntax with shell-like additions	PowerShell-specific, verbose but clear	Bash-like with additional modern constructs	Rust-like syntax with shell conveniences
Data Types	Strings, arrays, associative arrays (dictionaries)	Supports lists, maps, numbers, strings	Strongly typed tables, lists, dictionaries	Structured types like arrays, objects, maps	Lists, strings, functions as first-class citizens	Lists, dictionaries (associative arrays)	Full Python types + shell-specific types	.NET objects, strong typing	Rich type system, including records and variants	Primitive types, arrays, maps
Scripting Language	Yes, widely used for scripting, highly expressive but with some limitations	Yes, suitable for complex scripting	Yes, designed for scripting and data manipulation	Yes, with rich programming constructs	Yes, with functional scripting capabilities	Yes, with a focus on interactive use	Yes, leveraging Python's capabilities	Yes, powerful scripting with .NET framework	Yes, aiming for better scripting than Bash	Yes, with a focus on performance and safety
Pipeline Processing	Yes, but data passed as unstructured text	Yes, supports structured data in pipelines	Yes, table-oriented pipeline with structured data by default	Yes, with support for structured data	Yes, with functional data flow	Yes, with some structured data support	Yes, can pipe Python objects	Yes, pipes .NET objects	Yes, with improvements over Bash	Yes, with efficient data passing
Error Handling	Basic error handling using exit codes	Exception handling like modern programming languages	Built-in error handling with custom commands	Advanced error handling with try-catch-like structures	Basic, using functional approach	Improved error messages and handling	Python-style exception handling	Advanced error handling and reporting	Improved error handling over Bash	Rust-inspired error handling
Cross-Platform Support	Yes, but native Windows support requires WSL or third-party implementations	Yes, cross-platform	Yes, cross-platform	Yes, cross-platform	Yes, cross-platform	Yes, cross-platform	Yes, cross-platform	Yes, truly cross-platform (Windows, Linux, macOS)	Yes, aims for cross-platform compatibility	Limited, primarily focused on Unix-like systems
Interactive Features	REPL with autocompletion and command history	Rich REPL with autocompletion, suggestions, and innovative directory navigation	Interactive REPL with a focus on data pipelines	Interactive REPL with scripting support	Minimal REPL, functional style	Extensive autosuggestions, web-based configuration	Python REPL with shell integrations	Rich REPL with object inspection	Aims to improve upon Bash's interactive features	Efficient command-line editing and history
Concurrency Support	Yes, via job control and external tools	Supports concurrent execution through peach command and background jobs	Yes, supports parallel execution with par-each command	Yes, supports concurrency through parallel processing	No native concurrency support	Basic job control	Python's concurrency primitives	Robust support for parallel processing	Improved job control over Bash	Efficient multi-threading support
Extensibility	Extendable via functions and external scripts	Extendable through functions and modules	Custom commands and plugins	Extendable via built-in modules and external tools	Extendable via higher-order functions and custom scripts	Plugin system, customizable completions	Extensible through Python modules	Extensible through .NET modules and snap-ins	Aiming for better extensibility than Bash	Extendable through custom commands
Integration with Traditional Shell Tools	High, fully integrates with Unix tools	Good integration, supports many POSIX shell commands	Good integration, but designed to be more self-contained	High, integrates with many traditional Unix tools	Good integration, but unique syntax may affect seamless use	High integration with Unix tools	Can use both Python libraries and shell tools	Can use traditional tools, but often has built-in alternatives	High, aiming for Bash compatibility	Good integration with Unix tools
Package Management	None built-in, relies on external tools	Built-in package manager	Built-in package manager (nu_plugin)	None built-in, but can use external tools	None built-in, relies on external tools	Built-in package manager (fisher)	Can use pip and conda	PowerShellGet for modules	None built-in, aiming for compatibility with existing tools	None built-in, relies on system package manager
Documentation & Community	Extensive documentation, very large community	Good documentation, active community	Growing documentation, active community	Moderate documentation, smaller community	Sparse documentation, niche community	Extensive documentation, large community	Good documentation, growing community	Extensive documentation, large community	Growing documentation and community	Moderate documentation, smaller community
Target Audience	General users, system administrators, developers	Users interested in functional programming and modern shell features	Data analysts, developers focused on structured data and pipelines	Developers wanting a more capable shell with additional programming features	Enthusiasts of functional programming and minimalistic design	Users seeking a more user-friendly shell experience	Python developers, data scientists	Windows administrators, cross-platform devops	Users seeking a modern Bash alternative	Systems programmers, performance enthusiasts
Unique Features	Ubiquitous, standard shell on Unix-like systems	Modular design, innovative directory history and navigation	Native support for structured data (tables, JSON) in pipelines	Strong type system, with advanced scripting capabilities	Higher-order functions, minimalistic and functional, influenced by Plan 9	Web-based configuration, extensive autosuggestions	Seamless integration of Python and shell commands	Object-oriented pipeline, .NET integration	Aiming for better language design while maintaining Bash compatibility	High performance, memory safety from Rust
Maturity	Highly mature, widely adopted	Mature and stable	Relatively new, under active development	Less mature, niche user base	Mature but niche, with a small user base	Mature, widely adopted alternative shell	Stable, actively developed	Mature, widely used in Windows environments	Under active development, not yet stable	Relatively new, under active development

Additional Advantages Over Bash:

• Elvish:

  • Provides functional programming capabilities and richer data structures
  • Offers a more modern, Pythonic syntax
  • Features innovative directory navigation and history management
  • Includes a built-in package manager

• NuShell:

  • Offers table-oriented data pipelines and strong typing
  • Treats command outputs as structured data (like tables or JSON) by default
  • Provides a custom syntax designed for modern data processing and analysis
  • Includes a built-in package manager (nu_plugin)

• Murex:

  • Combines traditional shell scripting with advanced programming constructs
  • Offers better error handling with try-catch-like structures
  • Provides a strong type system for more robust scripting

• Es Shell:

  • Provides a minimalistic, functional shell environment with higher-order functions
  • Offers a simple syntax inspired by RC and Plan 9 shell, which can be more expressive for certain tasks

• Fish (Friendly Interactive Shell):

  • Offers superior out-of-the-box experience with user-friendly features
  • Provides extensive autosuggestions and web-based configuration
  • Includes a built-in package manager (fisher)
  • Features more readable and consistent syntax

• Xonsh:

  • Combines the power of Python with shell scripting
  • Allows seamless use of Python libraries in shell operations
  • Provides Python-style exception handling in a shell environment

• PowerShell:

  • Provides object-oriented pipelines, allowing for more structured data manipulation
  • Offers deep integration with the .NET framework
  • Features strong typing and advanced error handling
  • Truly cross-platform (Windows, Linux, macOS) with native support

• Oil:

  • Aims to address Bash's limitations while maintaining compatibility
  • Offers a rich type system, including records and variants
  • Provides improved error handling and language design
  • Potentially offers a smoother transition for Bash users seeking modern features

• Ion:

  • Focuses on performance and memory safety, leveraging Rust's strengths
  • Offers efficient multi-threading support
  • Provides a Rust-inspired syntax with shell conveniences
  • Emphasizes speed in command-line editing and history operations

---

Quick-scan table (mostly Yes/No)

Legend: ✅ yes, ❌ no, ⚠️ partial/depends, 🧩 via plugins/community tooling

Property	Bash	Elvish	NuShell	Murex	es-shell	fish	xonsh	PowerShell	Oils	Ion
Structured pipeline by default (not just text)	❌	✅	✅	✅	⚠️	❌	✅	✅	⚠️	⚠️
Cross-platform (Windows without WSL)	⚠️	✅	✅	✅	✅	✅	✅	✅	⚠️	⚠️
Bash/POSIX compatibility goal	✅	❌	❌	❌	❌	❌	❌	❌	✅	❌
Good interactive UX out-of-box	⚠️	✅	✅	✅	⚠️	✅	⚠️	✅	⚠️	⚠️
First-class modules/packages	❌	✅	🧩	✅	⚠️	🧩	✅ (Python)	✅	❌	❌
Built-in package manager	❌	✅	🧩 (nupm)	✅ (murex-package)	❌	❌ (community)	🧩 (pip/conda)	✅ (PowerShellGet / Gallery ecosystem)	❌	❌
Maturity (1=young, 5=mature)	5	4	3	3	2	4	4	5	3	2

Notes:

• Murex package manager correction: Murex includes its own package manager (murex-package). It’s oriented around installing packages from URIs (often git repos) rather than a single central “app store” style repository.
• NuShell packages: There’s an official community package manager repo (nupm) and module install patterns, but it’s not “built into the nu binary” in the same way as, say, PowerShell’s default module ecosystem.
• “Cross-platform” here is about practical native support; everything can be made to run somewhere if you squint hard enough.

---

Detailed comparison (descriptive)

Feature	Bash	Elvish	NuShell	Murex	es-shell	fish	xonsh	PowerShell	Oils (Oil/OSH/YSH)	Ion
Language paradigm	Imperative, procedural	Functional-leaning, rich data structures	Structured, pipeline/table oriented	Hybrid shell + language	Functional-leaning (rc/Plan9-ish)	Imperative, UX-first	Python-based	Object-oriented + imperative	Bash-compatible + better language goals	Rust-ish “modern shell”
Syntax	Traditional POSIX/Bash	Modern, consistent	Custom, data-centric	Expressive, typed streams	Minimalist, functional	Readable, consistent	Python + shell primitives	Verbose but explicit	Transitional: OSH/Bash-like; YSH adds more	Concise, Rust-flavored
Core data types	Strings, arrays, maps	Lists, maps, numbers	Tables/records/lists	Structured types, typed streams	Lists/functions	Lists, vars	Full Python types	.NET objects	OSH for shell; YSH adds richer types	Arrays/maps, primitives
Pipeline semantics	Text streams	Structured values	Structured tables by default	Typed/structured data streams	Functional composition	Mostly text	Python objects possible	.NET objects	Mostly shell-like; some upgrades	Mixed
Error handling	Exit codes, set -e footguns	Exceptions / structured errors	Structured errors	Better error patterns	Minimal	Better UX errors	Python exceptions	Structured errors	Better than Bash intent	Rust-ish patterns
Interactive features	Completion/history varies	Strong REPL, navigation	Strong REPL	Strong REPL	Basic	Best-in-class UX	Depends config	Strong REPL + inspection	Improving	Basic/varies
Extensibility	Shell funcs + external tools	Modules/functions	Plugins + commands	Modules + tooling	Extensible language	Completions/functions	Python ecosystem	Modules/snap-ins	Project-driven	Custom commands
Package management	None	Built-in ecosystem	Community tooling (e.g., nupm)	Built-in (murex-package)	None	Community (fisher, etc.)	pip/conda	PowerShellGet/Gallery	None	None
Best fit	Ubiquitous scripting + portability	Modern shell scripting	Data wrangling pipelines	Safer/typed shell work	Minimal functional shell	Daily interactive shell	Python-heavy workflows	Admin + automation + objects	Bash upgrade path	Experimental modern shell

---

“Advantages over Bash” (with corrected bits)

• Elvish

  • Richer built-in data structures + functional-ish style
  • Clean, consistent scripting ergonomics
  • Excellent interactive features

• NuShell

  • Structured data pipelines (tables/records) so you stop parsing strings
  • Great for inspecting / transforming data
  • Plugin ecosystem; community package tooling (ex: nupm)

• Murex

  • Strong focus on safer, structured/typed streams and modern scripting ergonomics
  • Includes a package manager (murex-package) oriented around URIs / repos rather than a single central catalog

• es-shell

  • Minimalist, functional-ish shell derived from rc traditions

• fish

  • Best out-of-the-box interactive experience, autosuggestions, easy config

• xonsh

  • Python integration: you get the whole Python ecosystem in your shell

• PowerShell

  • Object pipelines + .NET integration
  • Strong tooling + module ecosystem
  • Truly cross-platform PowerShell Core

• Oils (Oil/OSH/YSH)

  • Designed as an upgrade path: keep running shell scripts (OSH), write better ones (YSH)
  • Explicitly targets Bash/POSIX pain points while staying compatible where it matters

• Ion

  • Rust-based shell with performance/safety aspirations; more experimental/niche

---

Meta note: Shell choice is less about “best language” and more about where you want your suffering to live: in quoting rules, in type conversions, in plugin ecosystems, or in portability constraints.

Note: While these shells offer various advantages, the choice of shell often depends on specific use cases, personal preferences, and the operating system environment. Bash remains highly capable and is the most widely used and supported shell across Unix-like systems, with a vast ecosystem of scripts and tools built around it.

I'd suggest rephrasing the properties so they can be qualified as a simple yes/no, or number, so readers can scan the table more quickly.

@rsenna @humphreylee @esafak

Implemented all of your suggestions. Probably still needs cleanup, but I'm short on time currently, enjoy