From owner-freebsd-current Fri Aug 24 22:30:20 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from peter3.wemm.org (c1315225-a.plstn1.sfba.home.com [24.14.150.180]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15ECC37B401; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 22:30:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from overcee.netplex.com.au (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by peter3.wemm.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7P5UGM91791; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 22:30:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.netplex.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17363810; Fri, 24 Aug 2001 22:30:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Jordan Hubbard Cc: kc5vdj@yahoo.com, kris@obsecurity.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why is csh tcsh? This can be a bad thing... In-Reply-To: <20010824094600W.jkh@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 22:30:16 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20010825053016.D17363810@overcee.netplex.com.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > Because of certain differences, it cannot be used wholesale as a > > replacement for csh. > > Then please enumerate them so that they can be given due attention. > This is exactly the sort of detailed feedback that was requested when > we first raised the issue of switching over, and nobody could come up > with any concrete differences that would cause harm, so the deed was > done. We switched for several reasons: 1: csh script interface sucks 2: csh user interface sucks 3: tcsh user interface is one of the better ones. csh is not a serious scripting language and hardly anybody ever uses it as one in scripts that have sufficient complexity to notice the difference. As far as user interfaces go, tcsh is as close to a superset as you can get. That was a step up for the majority of users who actually use it and it is still "close enough" that built-in finger knowledge works as expected. We made "genuine" csh available as a port in case somebody *has* to have it for actual scripting that was impossible to tweak to run under tcsh. (see ports/shells/44bsd-csh). Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message