Apparently, csh programming is considered harmful.
perrin at apotheon.com
Thu Dec 13 23:06:26 PST 2007
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 04:25:30AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2007-12-13 18:05, Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com> wrote:
> > I ran across this today:
> > http://www.faqs.org/faqs/unix-faq/shell/csh-whynot/
> > Title:
> > Csh Programming Considered Harmful
> > I wonder what responses I might get here, and how much of this applies
> > to tcsh as well (I'm still not exactly a tcsh expert).
> Most of the points made in the FAQ about scripting large `applications'
> with csh ring a bell for me. Now, having said that, /bin/sh is nice for
> small to medium-sized scripts, but there is a certain point where even
> sh(1) becomes annoying.
> Do you have any _particular_ parts of the csh-whynot article that you
> would like to discuss, or this is a free for all flame? :)
It's a free-for-all -- but not really a flame. I was looking for some
general opinions and insights on the matter. As I said, I'm still not
exactly a tcsh expert (though, in general, I find I like it more than
bash as my command shell).
I don't generally like using any of the common shells for "real"
programming, anyway. Anything beyond just automating a few commands so I
don't get RSI, I tend to go with Perl or Ruby for scripting.
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Kent Beck: "I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java. I
just didn't know it would be called Ruby."
More information about the freebsd-questions