[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/11]
On Dec 10, 2006, at 6:08 PM, Martin Ebourne wrote: > On Sun, 2006-12-10 at 15:29 -0600, Peter da Silva wrote: >> tcsh is hateful because csh is hateful as a scripting language. >> >> As an interactive shell it's no more hateful than any other. > > That unfortunately is a flawed argument. > As long as tcsh exists and people use it, people will write scripts in > it. And, as I obviously agree, that's hateful. The silver lining to this cloud of hate is that it sucks so badly as a scripting language that only determined idiots will continue to do so, and frankly if someone is so stupid as to write a script in tcsh it's really unlikely that they're going to be writing a script I want to use. zsh is *more* hateful than tcsh because the impact on non-zsh users of zsh scripts is just as hateful as the impact of tcsh scripts on non-tcsh users, but unlike tcsh the guy writing the script doesn't *also* suffer. > If you use a different shell for interactive use than scripting its > just > another unnecessary language to learn, and occasional users will end up > making stupid mistakes when they keep switching between the two. Yeh, that's hateful too. So's adding command-line editing as an afterthought to the Bourne or Korn shells. They all suck. That's because they're software.
Generated at 22:01 on 27 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52