From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 14 01:12:35 2007 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 8DA6016A417 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:12:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike.jeays@rogers.com) Received: from smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com (smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com [206.190.36.82]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C25F13C467 for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:12:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike.jeays@rogers.com) Received: (qmail 92291 invoked from network); 14 Dec 2007 01:12:34 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=rogers.com; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=4HZhOWuL6V9SwNZmpXDuGYW8rgMvDSQxZHIphSwsc4jAx1rWlFyU6qfEWovjMS4xbdGXHpa1cmUV/zvpTqKMAvkNotYUvu5wcb58Ytzn0RUnk0qGeJhFD9x3I78+jLhLD1a/Bu2PDrSPo7eD9LmTAxm22TiQm6inK3tWkL3OgV4= ; Received: from unknown (HELO napoleon.local) (mike.jeays@rogers.com@99.224.73.40 with login) by smtp104.rog.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Dec 2007 01:12:34 -0000 X-YMail-OSG: 9WMUzUcVM1kubaNbkMJa2TQLGywIlQ0F581znwxs5Kc5WWwtpI05aqq7.UDTEz8NMA-- From: Mike Jeays To: FreeBSD Questions Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:12:32 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <20071214010542.GA19553@demeter.hydra> In-Reply-To: <20071214010542.GA19553@demeter.hydra> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200712132012.32729.mike.jeays@rogers.com> Subject: Re: Apparently, csh programming is considered harmful. 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: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:12:35 -0000 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. 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. -- Mike Jeays http://www.jeays.ca