From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 6 20:03:38 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 C290E1065672 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 20:03:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from parv@pair.com) Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com (hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com [71.74.56.125]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76FEB8FC1A for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 20:03:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=xm0otvE9/LjRWYlyDrHfx7zP0/MGCmNk7gQgTP1ehto= c=1 sm=0 a=ipU4KYbqMnUA:10 a=hO-oPbc3tlwA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=64iin7ZDX+lUS8OB6KzQoA==:17 a=8qv3a8-5CBNdxOsN9VwA:9 a=MJ4YC6ugML_nCPNRNP51OkBVHmgA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=64iin7ZDX+lUS8OB6KzQoA==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 98.150.184.250 Received: from [98.150.184.250] ([98.150.184.250:26823] helo=localhost.hawaii.res.rr.com) by hrndva-oedge03.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.39 r()) with ESMTP id 38/B3-01419-81FFB0C4; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:03:37 +0000 Received: from holstein.holy.cow (parv [127.0.0.2]) by localhost.hawaii.res.rr.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 806375C91 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 10:06:29 -1000 (HST) Received: (from parv@localhost) by holstein.holy.cow (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id o56K6TpX008802 for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 10:06:29 -1000 (HST) (envelope-from parv@pair.com) X-Authentication-Warning: holstein.holy.cow: parv set sender to parv@pair.com using -f Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 10:06:28 -1000 From: parv@pair.com To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20100606200628.GA8748@holstein.holy.cow> 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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100606182148.GB28095@guilt.hydra> 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: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:03:38 -0000 in message <20100606182148.GB28095@guilt.hydra>, wrote Chad Perrin thusly... ... > > > On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 04:17:15PM -0700, Chip Camden wrote: > > > > > > > > I like zsh, because it's sh-compatible, brings in a lot of > > > > the good ideas from csh/tcsh, and the license appears to be > > > > copyfree rather than copyleft. ... > I'm curious about why you prefer zsh for an interactive shell. > What zsh features would you miss if you used tcsh instead (what > I've been using)? > > I'm always willing to be convinced to try something better. I cannot say about the tcsh features. 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. 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. And of course, as stated earlier, compatibility between a bourne shell script & an interactive shell helps immensely while developing|debugging a script. - parv --