Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:30:49 -0700
From:      Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Backtick versus $()
Message-ID:  <20110224223049.GA13424@guilt.hydra>
In-Reply-To: <loom.20110224T233208-284@post.gmane.org>
References:  <AANLkTinQ4MMwWq77k1t-SwqE%2BzPep6VCNS9AKdT_H08b@mail.gmail.com> <loom.20110224T214917-136@post.gmane.org> <AANLkTik88V5Bb2BWM0Kpv3rWfek9_%2BgjqmEt6UbsVjpS@mail.gmail.com> <loom.20110224T220407-811@post.gmane.org> <AANLkTikAB--0Hrw76cbdzgfmeJMPt_N7isaw%2Byn_-QMn@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.BSM.4.64L.1102242135020.1945@herc.mirbsd.org> <20110224213322.GA13089@guilt.hydra> <loom.20110224T225518-308@post.gmane.org> <20110224221057.GA13262@guilt.hydra> <loom.20110224T233208-284@post.gmane.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--jI8keyz6grp/JLjh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:34:25PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Chad Perrin <perrin <at> apotheon.com> writes:
> >
> > 1. You think some measure of popularity of a decision makes it correct.
>=20
> No.

Why do you substitute others' email messages for an actual, direct
response to my question, then?


> >
> > 2. You don't like (t)csh.
>=20
> No. I just point out it=E2=80=99s not a suitable scripting shell.

Who said anything about using it for scripting?  The URIs you provided
all lead to others talking about what to use as an *interactive* shell.
I use tcsh as an interactive shell all the time, and use sh as a
scripting shell.  Having (t)csh as the default shell in no way means you
have to do your admin scripting in (t)csh.


> >
> > 3. You think your opinions are so self-evident that everybody will just
> > immediately understand them, their reasoning, and the best way to proce=
ed
> > from there.
>=20
> I may have some shortcomings when it comes to getting a point across.

You didn't even try to make a point.


>=20
> > 1. Is it a good idea to replace (t)csh?
>=20
> Probably. (Even Android uses mksh these days.) But that=E2=80=99s up to y=
ou
> guys. On the other hand, it=E2=80=99s tradition.

"Probably."  Why?  Just saying it's so doesn't make it so.


>=20
> But then, I never asked for this (here, I did in other places) either.
> See above.

What was the point of referring to the "sensible thing", then?


>=20
> Anyway, goodnight (and I=E2=80=99ll probably not get back to this thread,
> just hope to have brought some thought-provoking impulse).

It's not thought-provoking if it doesn't include any thought.  If you
think you have a compelling argument, you'll have better luck provoking
thought by letting us in on it.

--=20
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]

--jI8keyz6grp/JLjh
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAk1m3BkACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKWouQCdEoeK513Y2w3/iHAHUM0gWfBr
ioAAoLEfFXVNvkw5lZ6z1kg78PG9Ipmi
=v3HF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--jI8keyz6grp/JLjh--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110224223049.GA13424>