> If you treat shell as a DSL for files and streams, nothing can beat it. Shell is amazing.
On the other hand, wouldn’t you just define anything that beats it also a shell? In my opinion, Fish beats Bash and Zsh in this area, and I would definitely call it a shell even though it’s not a POSIX-compatible shell. A more extreme example would be PowerShell (I’m not a fan but some people love it).
Where would you draw the line between a “shell” and an “interpreted scripting language that beats POSIX shells on dealing with files and streams”?