Importing mksh in base

[Simon J. Gerraty]

Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert at cschubert.com> wrote:
> Interactively ksh93's command completion listing looks unconventional 
> but it functions the same.
> 
> However programmatically it's the standard. Large commercial vendors, 
> like Oracle, still require ksh for its array handling among other 
> things.

pdksh (hence I assume mksh) has had array support for ages.
The only thing I ever found it useful for was cd history,
and I actually have an implementation of that for sh that does not need
arrays.

> It has that advantage. For embedded this is an advantage. However if 
> embedded is using ksh as a scripting language mksh and pdksh aren't 

As noted earlier I've used [pd]ksh as shell for 30 years.
I do *not* write ksh scripts (except for .kshrc etc ;-)

The beauty of ksh as interactive shell is it's (mostly) compatability
with /bin/sh - which scripts should be written in.

Now on some systems (HPUX springs to mind ;-) /bin/sh is so bad that
one has to use ksh to run scripts - but they are still sh scripts.