From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 25 00:44:57 2011 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 659B01065700 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:44:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from 839273@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gy0-f182.google.com (mail-gy0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167E28FC16 for ; Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:44:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gyh4 with SMTP id 4so588413gyh.13 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:44:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to :references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rcI7IsfGAfj7B5l9OeC0cat8xPXeSPxvHtBo7AWwWME=; b=CjxmrdpQHHEFfZ50lpNnAGOMmU4kmT0US17mdeZR21alVU3WUBm3V7iU6Vl3dznXiB Zs6imaBwAZGRbP1kn6WV0exRcTIjtlFDurroQnV9XX8lgfi7zGPMjgezh5704bm6bdk2 lLgvxdONOjD9tgQdR6QLEU69CJVzzAZpq3H4I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=cuyi+3ka19HsBcz/8jxID9u1K7s7S1y2PRRV0LhkHCRBBTj8WeCGgK0s9xl4WlsWj9 9BNAq9ur6gQC6Qh2Hfdhq+5raePO78XbbtmCzc2cDlAlCMe//Xu4lxG6TwPcgS8ZGAGO mTx6Ui7RSdO0SVXz01oiLyUHaC4ei68HWMrHI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.150.145.9 with SMTP id s9mr2771522ybd.125.1298594695781; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:44:55 -0800 (PST) Sender: 839273@gmail.com Received: by 10.150.215.21 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 16:44:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20110225002644.GA14159@guilt.hydra> References: <20110224234044.0df661c1.freebsd@edvax.de> <20110224225425.GB13490@guilt.hydra> <20110225001301.e4f6d95f.freebsd@edvax.de> <21929_1298589484_4D66E72C_21929_309_1_D9B37353831173459FDAA836D3B43499BD35499F@WADPMBXV0.waddell.com> <20110224232404.GA13838@guilt.hydra> <20110225002644.GA14159@guilt.hydra> Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 20:14:55 -0430 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 00fx4rBbBjUpE91fwS2yZqj3oVU Message-ID: From: Andres Perera To: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Chad Perrin Subject: Re: Backtick versus $() X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: 839273@gmail.com List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 00:44:57 -0000 On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 7:56 PM, Chad Perrin wrote: > I'll try to help make it easy for you, since you seem to be having a lot > of trouble grasping the concept of actually trying to make a point via > logical argument and presentation of evidence: > > Start with the Wikipedia page comparing command shells [0]. =C2=A0Look th= rough > the various tables there -- feel free to ignore the "Programming > features" table since it's irrelevant to the question of what makes a > good interactive user shell -- to see where shells differ. =C2=A0Based on= the > differences you find, build up a list of reasons that tcsh is not as good > a choice as mksh. no, let's start by looking at the SOURCE CODE REPOSITORY instead of WIKIPED= IA you DROOLING BUFFOON > > Next, offer some examples of common command line syntax rules and how > they affect the way we compose commands. =C2=A0Such examples should inclu= de > stuff like: > > * environment variable assignment, printing, and export export is the same as environment variable assignment in this context why is this relevant to interactive shells and not scripting? arbitrary > * nesting commands "nesting" commands? another programming paradigm? > * completion and history access modern ksh variants include file completion, tcsh does arbitrary completion through aliases the second is arguably misguided since unix is file-centric, not --long-option-centric > * useful configuration file characteristics and capabilities define "useful" > > Then, of course, you can go on to further strengthen your case with > references to dependencies, licensing, resource consumption and on-drive > size, bugs, and so on. no, bugs is the primary concern because the underlying design is more important than having flashy lights if you disagree then you are retarded and the exchange concludes just explicitly say it: "i don't care if the shell is bugged from hell and = back" > > Any of this stuff might actually present a meaningful argument, as > opposed to just asserting other people are idiots, claiming you're right > with nothing to back it up, and generally waving your hands and making a > lot of noise without convincing anyone of anything. > > (By the way, I'll save you the trouble of referring to the license. =C2= =A0I > know that mksh uses the same license as the MirOS project, which is a > variant of the Historic Permission license. =C2=A0It's a copyfree license= ; I > have no objects to using it on those grounds, personally.) > > -- > Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] >