Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:53:46 +0530 From: vijayendra gadgil <vijayendra.gadgil@gmail.com> To: Tom Huppi <thuppi@huppi.com> Cc: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Shell Games Message-ID: <afa60d2404123100235580cb3f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.58.0412310001040.39721@nuumen.pair.com> References: <49B5BEF2.7CCF22F4.0F75C5EC@netscape.net> <1104458982.622.3.camel@chaucer> <F2007F7E-5AD6-11D9-BAFF-000D932D61F0@ohko.org> <Pine.BSF.4.58.0412310001040.39721@nuumen.pair.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:30:16 -0500 (EST), Tom Huppi <thuppi@huppi.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2004, Nicolas Mackintosh wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > I've always looked at the shell as a very personal thing. Some will
> > prefer Bash, others will want to play with something completely
> > different. It's a bit like having a favorite hammer... Only a lot more
> > elegant!
>
> Heh...you have not seen my work then :)
>
> My two cents, though: I started out in a multi-platform
> environment and thus choose Bourne Shell for scripting (and still
> had to learn the sed, awk, etc differences since most shells are
> pretty useless alone.) As time goes by, I suspect it's less of an
> issue even for the few folks who find themselves in such a
> position. I will mention, though, that knowing Bourne Shell and
> portability issues can come in handy for working with autoconf,
> and that is likely a more common demand these days.
>
> FWIW, I've always used 'tcsh' interactively, but almost switched a
> while back out of disgust at not being able to figure out how to
> get a one-line foreach/{do_something}/end loop (which would allow
> me to re-run a complex command easily.)
I would recommend 'ksh' it does the tasks of both 'csh' and 'sh' with
advanced programming features, check out http://www.kornshell.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?afa60d2404123100235580cb3f>