csh vs tcsh

[dsr at tao.merseine.nu (dsr at tao.merseine.nu)]

On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 06:47:27PM -0500, taalebi at ai.mit.edu wrote:
> 
> I have decided to use tcsh now and look into zsh later.
> 
> And by the way, was is the advantage of using bash then?

Traditionally, csh and derivatives are not well-suited for scripting.
The appropriate portable scripting shells are plain Bourne shell (sh),
and Korn shell (ksh).

The Bourne Again Shell (bash) retains backwards compatibility with sh,
while providing the modern features of the csh and zsh in a stable
environment.

Small sh scripts are among the easiest, most portable code to write, and
often used to bootstrap large code bases. For example, Oracle uses shell
scripts to prepare a Java environment for its installer to run in.

A random user has no particular reason to learn more than one shell; but
it is a perq of the sysadmins to argue about the relative features of
their preferred environments.

-dsr-

-- 
Network engineer looking for work in Boston area.
Resume at http://tao.merseine.nu/~dsr/