• smiletolerantly@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 hours ago

    That analogy only holds if they cook the burger for you, hold it in front of you, and go “we don’t make this”, then throwing it out

    • nialv7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      No, it’d be like, when you asked them do you know what a burger is? They pointed at a picture of a burger on the wall (they put this picture on the wall because for whatever reason people kept asking them to make burgers), and told you, of course we know what a burger is, we don’t make them, now order noodles or get out!

      • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Okay, you know what… That’s actually better than what I said. Defeat acknowledged.

        (However, it still seems a bit silly to me. name="value" will prompt you to enter set name "value", with your exact name/value prefilled. As far as I know, it really is just syntax substitution; or am I wrong here? Are there semantic differences that can’t be translated?)

        • nialv7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          54 minutes ago

          i think it could be a slippery slope thing. things like name="value" are easy to parse and implement, but then what if people keep asking for a little bit more, and a little bit more again? bash’s syntax is very very complex, there will be no winners if fish has a half-assed implementation of what bash does, it’s better to not even start.