I wonder what the author thinks of zsh. Unlike bash, zsh completion just works. It's context-aware, properly completes subcommands and options, and doesn't suffer from the problem explained in the article. It even shows descriptions for each of the completion candidates.

In contrast, bash almost always falls back to filename completion for the most common commands even when third party frameworks like bash-completion are installed. It's frustrating when I have to deal with interactive bash sessions because, sigh, Docker.