Post a Comment
At work I have to use ksh for scripting. It's 99% the same as bash, but arrays are a huge quagmire in ksh, and don't get me started on the 'set' command. I don't dislike scripting in ksh, but in the few ways that bash and ksh differ, I prefer bash.
I cannot _stand_ ksh as an interactive shell. I'm a huge vi fan, but it just does not make sense for command editing. I developed muscle memory on bash, with tab completion and up/down-arrows for history, and anything else feels incredibly awkward. At least seven times per day I want to kick down the door to the machine room and put a large calibre round through the freakin build machine that doesn't have bash installed.
Ahhh... I feel much better now... it's been a long day.
I love zsh as well. It has an enormous amount of neat features and is very powerful. For a great starting point to see what you can do with zsh, check out this guy's dotfiles:
http://strcat.neessen.net/dotfiles/#zsh
Take your time and go through all the files; they're fairly well commented.
I've only been using *nix for around 20 years and had never heard anyone use the term, "siqil", since I was a printers apprentice in the early 70's as a reference to the shot mark or union label, using this term for the home directory tilde was a surprise. Anybody ever hear that before?
sigil, not siqil.
See http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=sigil&go_button=Search
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigil_(computer_programming)
"TCSH -> obscure"
Maybe. I'll give you that one.
"ZSH -> lack of features"
You've got to be completely insane. Me thinks you've never read the docs on this one.
"KSH -> unmaintained"
Since when? Not only is pdksh maintained, but the pdksh used on both OpenBSD and NetBSD are fully maintained and get new features quite often.
"Why do we still speak about the others? If you can't do it on BASH use a scripting language."
Because I'm damn well not installing a non-standard shell on my BSD or Solaris boxes just to write scripts. This may ne a shocker for you, but Linux is not the only system around and bash is hardly a standard on any other UNIX/UNIX-like system.
"lack of understanding"
yes, because they're all so very different...no wait, they aren't.
"TCSH -> obscure"
So?
"ZSH -> lack of features"
Wrong.
"KSH -> unmaintained"
Wrong.
How many new features does a shell need anyway?
"Why do we still speak about the others?"
Because people like them?
"If you can't do it on BASH use a scripting language."
If your scripts aren't compatible with POSIX /bin/sh you're doing something wrong.








