Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:16:14 -0500 From: Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@msu.edu> To: Mike Jeays <mike.jeays@rogers.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Apparently, csh programming is considered harmful. Message-ID: <20071214011614.GA18559@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> In-Reply-To: <200712132012.32729.mike.jeays@rogers.com> References: <20071214010542.GA19553@demeter.hydra> <200712132012.32729.mike.jeays@rogers.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Dec 13, 2007 at 08:12:32PM -0500, Mike Jeays wrote: > On December 13, 2007 08:05:42 pm Chad Perrin wrote: > > I ran across this today: > > > > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/ > > > > Title: > > Csh Programming Considered Harmful > > > > I wonder what responses I might get here, and how much of this applies to > > tcsh as well (I'm still not exactly a tcsh expert). > > As you can see, it is 11 years old, but still good advice. For interactive > use, tcsh is not too bad, but for writing scripts of any length, sh or bash > are considered better tools. For code that will run anywhere, stick to the > sh subset. > > <flamebait>Bash has all the features one is likely to need for interactive use > as well, and one could make a good case for it being the 'standard' shell > now.</flamebait> Here it is. I find bash to be ugly and hate it for interactive use. I would rather just use /bin/sh. ////jerry > > -- > Mike Jeays > http://www.jeays.ca > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071214011614.GA18559>