[nSLUG] Plems with Linux etch

George N. White III gnwiii at gmail.com
Fri Aug 24 09:51:12 ADT 2007


On 8/23/07, Mike Spencer <mspencer at tallships.ca> wrote:

> Bash is one them tools I have to read the instructions each time I
> take it out of the box.  That happens when I have to fix some script
> or when I'm root.  Othrwise, I use tcsh.

Please read:

Subject: Csh Programming Considered Harmful
This article was archived around: 6 Oct 1996 14:03:18 GMT
All FAQs in Directory: unix-faq/shell
All FAQs posted in: comp.unix.shell, comp.unix.questions,
comp.unix.programmer, comp.infosystems.www.authoring.cgi
Source: Usenet Version

Archive-name: unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot
Version: $Id: csh-faq,v 1.7 95/09/28 12:52:17 tchrist Exp Locker: tchrist $

The following periodic article answers in excruciating detail
the frequently asked question "Why shouldn't I program in csh?".
It is available for anon FTP from perl.com in /pub/perl/versus/csh.whynot.gz

	       *** CSH PROGRAMMING CONSIDERED HARMFUL ***

    Resolved: The csh is a tool utterly inadequate for programming,
	      and its use for such purposes should be strictly banned!
   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why is that people who started out with csh find it so hard to switch?
My impression is that many people adopted csh as their login shell
when the original sh was the alternative.  At the time csh offerred
convenience of command-line history and editing, but all that is in
the current POSIX sh standard along with functions and all the other
good things.   Linux users can't get very far without some sh scripting,
but many never encounter csh.   The only reason we need people using
csh is to find bugs before they hit some legacy app that still relies on csh.

-- 
George N. White III <aa056 at chebucto.ns.ca>
Head of St. Margarets Bay, Nova Scotia



More information about the nSLUG mailing list