From owner-freebsd-current  Fri Mar  3  1: 9:26 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from hugo10.ka.punkt.de (hugo10.ka.punkt.de [194.77.233.242])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 1833037B529; Fri,  3 Mar 2000 01:09:22 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from hausen@punkt.de)
Received: (from ry93@localhost)
	by hugo10.ka.punkt.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA72276;
	Fri, 3 Mar 2000 10:09:17 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from ry93)
From: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de>
Message-Id: <200003030909.KAA72276@hugo10.ka.punkt.de>
Subject: C shell scripts (was: Re: which(1), rewritten in C?)
In-Reply-To: <20000303005651.A62723@dragon.nuxi.com> from "David O'Brien" at "Mar 3, 2000 00:56:51 am"
To: obrien@FreeBSD.ORG
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 10:09:17 +0100 (CET)
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Hi all!

> On Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 08:47:19PM -0500, Dan Papasian wrote:
> > While this may sound crazy, I was tired of 'which' taking a long
> > time to complete on my 486 dx4/100 when it was under extereme
> > pressure, so I rewrote it in C :)
> > 
> > I don't think that it is worthwhile replacing this perl script
> > with one written in C, but if anyone is interested...
> 
> Why in the world isn't ``which'' written as a csh shell script??

Most probably because C shell scripts should be avoided at any
cost.

See: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/

Regards,
Patrick
-- 
WEB Internet Services Systemhaus GmbH   Scheffelstr. 17a    76135 Karlsruhe
     phone +49 721 9109 0   fax +49 721 9109 100   http://www.punkt.de/
       Patrick M. Hausen   Technical Director   email hausen@punkt.de


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message