From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 7 04:06:32 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43F5F1065678 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 04:06:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from perrin@apotheon.com) Received: from cpoproxy2-pub.bluehost.com (cpoproxy2-pub.bluehost.com [67.222.39.38]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 13E108FC18 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2010 04:06:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 26035 invoked by uid 0); 7 Jun 2010 04:06:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO box543.bluehost.com) (74.220.219.143) by cpoproxy2.bluehost.com with SMTP; 7 Jun 2010 04:06:31 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=apotheon.com; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Mail-Followup-To:References:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:User-Agent:X-Identified-User; b=RjfjWpuXoak/PD9y8AvcSPGBWkGrSh4Q5QvTalWy8HX6PztMtyMwKdecU3TcNLSk/MJ/9cEY2ykGNszqjzAdsvdLvkW6tJcvcdnfLZ/cPIbIpt5zfpoFGEqSdPVp67Nz; Received: from c-24-8-180-234.hsd1.co.comcast.net ([24.8.180.234] helo=kukaburra.hydra) by box543.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLTba-0007J9-G1 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 22:06:31 -0600 Received: by kukaburra.hydra (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 06 Jun 2010 22:06:07 -0600 Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 22:06:07 -0600 From: Chad Perrin To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100607040607.GC29350@guilt.hydra> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20100605231715.GD69990@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> <20100606163136.GA27788@guilt.hydra> <20100606175043.GA46089@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> <20100606182148.GB28095@guilt.hydra> <20100606200628.GA8748@holstein.holy.cow> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="E/DnYTRukya0zdZ1" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100606200628.GA8748@holstein.holy.cow> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Identified-User: {2737:box543.bluehost.com:apotheon:apotheon.org} {sentby:smtp auth 24.8.180.234 authed with ren@apotheon.org} Subject: Re: which is the basic differences between the shells? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 04:06:32 -0000 --E/DnYTRukya0zdZ1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 10:06:28AM -1000, parv@pair.com wrote: >=20 > I cannot say about the tcsh features. That's kind of a shame, since tcsh is what I prefer these days, having long since given up on bash (pretty much immediately after I started using FreeBSD as my primary OS instead of bash, and realized I preferred the csh-style syntax). >=20 > I switched from bash to zsh mainly for excellent vi-mode editing > support, more so over multiple lines. ksh & bash were horrible in > that respect. I've never really tried using vi-mode editing in any shell, despite the fact I'm a constant vi user (even a vi gangsta, one might say). Maybe I should some day. Thus far, though, I don't even know if tcsh supports vi-mode editing. >=20 > Recently I have found that regular expression like [a-d] (instead of > {a,b,c,d}) in file name generation work as expected. zsh has more > ways to help file name generation which I have not looked into yet. >=20 > And of course, as stated earlier, compatibility between a bourne > shell script & an interactive shell helps immensely while > developing|debugging a script. This is another area where I just haven't run into the need for that sort of thing. When I use a regex at the command prompt, it's via grep, basically -- I don't tend to get more fancy than something like globbing. For scripting, I stick to sh and "real" programming languages like Perl and Ruby. I'm not terribly clear on tcsh's regex support, and I guess if I needed shell compatibility when writing a shell script (which, for me, is usually just a batch file, perhaps with a little flow control and a variable or two) I can always just start sh. --=20 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] --E/DnYTRukya0zdZ1 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAkwMcC8ACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKX1AACgoY8rByoluZA00p9jOYDCNqjy ZccAoM5ojQPhMQCCbgNIzmPZ4QXr/Ky4 =R2jF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --E/DnYTRukya0zdZ1--