From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Jul 19 13:42:22 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from athserv.otenet.gr (athserv.otenet.gr [195.170.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CFC337B98D for ; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 13:42:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from keramida@ceid.upatras.gr) Received: from hades.hell.gr (patr530-b043.otenet.gr [195.167.121.171]) by athserv.otenet.gr (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e6JKfIi14587; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 23:41:18 +0300 (EET DST) Received: (from charon@localhost) by hades.hell.gr (8.10.2/8.10.2) id e6JKerC87603; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 23:40:53 +0300 (EEST) Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 23:40:52 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: Alfred Perlstein Cc: questions Subject: Re: Is the C-shell (csh) a bad shell? Message-ID: <20000719234052.A87524@hades.hell.gr> References: <20000718160249.I13979@fw.wintelcom.net> <200007182310.QAA55420@pike.osd.bsdi.com> <20000718163411.L13979@fw.wintelcom.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.4i In-Reply-To: <20000718163411.L13979@fw.wintelcom.net>; from bright@wintelcom.net on Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 04:34:12PM -0700 X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3A 75 52 EB F1 58 56 0D - C5 B8 21 B6 1B 5E 4A C2 X-URL: http://students.ceid.upatras.gr/~keramida/index.html Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 04:34:12PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > The problem is that most scripts grow, and grow, and grow and.. well. :) Functions can be a tremendous help here, nobody would argue against this, unless they were totally out of their mind. > Once you need functions you're SOL, once you need the redirect > functionality you're SOL, syntax doesn't matter, it's the functionality > afforded by the shell and csh doesn't cut it. There are a few good reasons for knowing how to use both shells, though. I customarily use tcsh for interactive use, because I prefer it personally from bash. However, the system boot scripts are written in /bin/sh and I have always been writing my own scripts in /bin/sh, sed and awk (well, at least until I found out about perl5). If I had to choose one of the shells, and only one, I would quite probably choose /bin/sh and that's pretty much it. Even for interactive use, I still fork a copy of bash for commands like: tcsh% bash bash$ for fname in *.MP3 ;do mv "$fname" "`basename $fname mp3`.mp3" ;done bash$ exit But that is probably because I am more proficient in /bin/sh language than tcsh, and my bash background shows. -- "The sun is the same in a relative way, but you're older. Shorter of breath, and one day closer to death." > Pink Floyd, TIME (Dark Side of the Moon) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message