Comparision to NuShell about murex HOT 1 OPEN

hi @yonas

I think the biggest difference is that Nushell takes a similar approach to PowerShell in that ls (and other common utilities) is a shell builtin. This means it has more control over its own ecosystem but it comes at the cost of familiarity if you're used to any specific flags that haven't been included in Nushell's reimplementation.

Whereas Murex doesn't intend to reimplement coreutils. ls (et al) in Murex is the systems ls. So to support the same features as Nushell, Murex has semi-intelligent heuristics to parse the output plus the option of adding type annotations to the pipe should you want to enforce any specific behaviour.

That isn't to say the Murex doesn't have its own equivalent of ls (and so on) for instances when you want portability. But in those instances they're named differently. Murex goes out of its way to avoid duplicated function names / namespacing conflicts.

This means you can use Murex today like you use your existing shell and have all the additional safety and UX improvements that Murex brings, without having to learning all the nuances of a new shell. Yet there's still a wealth of advanced features available if you do want to move past the interactive shell prompt and write your own Murex shell scripts.

Murex has also been around a while longer than Nushell. Last time I tried Nushell, Murex was more mature (to the extent that Murex is now pretty stable and even has a backwards compatibility commitment). Though Nushell does have more contributors so it might have since caught up.

from murex.