fd

Many (most?) of them have been overhauled with success. For find there is fd[1]. There's batcat, exa (ls), ripgrep, fzf, atuin (history), delta (diff) and many more. Most are both backwards compatible and fresh and friendly. Your hardwon muscle memory still of good use. But there's sane flags and defaults too. It's faster, more colorful (if you wish), better integration with another (e.g. exa/eza or aware of git modifications). And, in my case, often features I never knew I needed (atuin sync!, ripgrep using gitignore). 1 https://github.com/sharkdp/fd

AFAIK there is a find replacement with sane defaults: https://github.com/sharkdp/fd , a lot of people I know love it. However, I already have this in my muscle memory: find <where> -name '<what>' -type f(file)/d(directory) Works in 90% of situations when searching for some file in terminal, ie: find / -name 'stuff*' The rest of the time is spent figuring out exec/xargs. :) And once you master that, swap xargs for GNU parallel. I bet your machine has a ton of cores, don't let then sit idly. ;)

> without zsh globs I have to remember find syntax My "solution" to this is using https://github.com/sharkdp/fd (even when in zsh and having glob support). I'm not sure if using a tool that's not present by default would be suitable for your use cases, but if you're considering alternate shells, I suspect you might be

Nice to see other alternatives to find. I personally use fd (https://github.com/sharkdp/fd) a lot, as I find the UX much better. There is one thing that I think could be better, around the difference between "wanting to list all files that follow a certain pattern" and "wanting to find one or a few specific files". Technically, those are the same, but an issue I'll often run into is wanting to search something in dotfiles (for example the Go tools), use the unrestricted mode, and it'll find the few files I'm looking for, alongside hundreds of files coming from some cache/backup directory somewhere. This happens even more with rg, as it'll look through the files contents. I'm not sure if this is me not using the tool how I should, me not using Linux how I should, me using the wrong tool for this job, something missing from the tool or some

Looking at the Unix to Plan 9 translation [1] gives me a different opinion. To name one egregious example, omitting find(1) in favor of piping du(1) (what is supposed to be a disk usage analyzer) to grep(1) is not an improvement; it's just user-unfriendliness in service of minimalist aesthetics. (Contrary to popular belief, find(1) is not a particularly "bloated" program; Rust's "fd" implementation is under 7,000 lines of code [2], about a third of the size of Lua.) [1]: https://9p.io/wiki/plan9/Unix_to_Plan_9_command_translation/... [2]: https://github.com/sharkdp/fd

You might like https://github.com/sharkdp/fd. I use it as it is fast, although I've used `find` for so long I have to think about the differences before I do.

tl;dr: - zsh+ohmyzsh - fdfind github.com/sharkdp/fd - duf github.com/muesli/duf "better df" - dust github.com/bootandy/dust "more intuitive du" - tldr github.com/tldr-pages/tldr-python-client tldr client in python - ripgrep github.com/BurntSushi/ripgrep This constitutes the "great" tools, there are more that are "good"