This is the reason its better to use a "Real Programming Language" leveraging libraries to do this job instead of a shell script. A ludicrous number of things to keep in mind for simple filenames and pathnames.
The only reason why this is an issue is that people insists in using bash in the name of backwards compatibility. It's about time people start considering moving away from bash - its design is broken and the efforts and time it takes to write safe bash shells might not be worth it.
Imho using oil/fish/etc trades unfavorable because of network effects but it is perfectly acceptable choice in many circumstances
If you're going to add a dependency you may as well just use a "real" language at that point.
I've been using Deno for "shell scripts" for a while and it's great. My only complaint is that `deno run` prints annoying "a new version of Demo is available" messages which it very clearly shouldn't. Hopefully they'll fix that.
Not necessarily. It's still easier to manipulate shell programs in fish[0] than it is in Python since fish was made explicitly for that. Calling external programs, using pipes, process substitution, etc. are easier in a "proper" shell language.
[0] Or any bash alternative of your choice: nushell, oils, xonsh, elvish, etc.