which is the basic differences between the shells?

[Chip Camden]

On Jun 06 2010 12:21, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 10:50:43AM -0700, Chip Camden wrote:
> > On Jun 06 2010 10:31, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 04:17:15PM -0700, Chip Camden wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > I like zsh, because it's sh-compatible, brings in a lot of the good ideas
> > > > from csh/tcsh, and the license appears to be copyfree rather than copyleft.
> > > 
> > > Do you use that as your interactive shell, for scripting, or both?
> > 
> > Interactive only.  For scripting, I stick to sh unless it gets too complex --
> > then I jump to Ruby.
> 
> I'm curious about why you prefer zsh for an interactive shell.  What zsh
> features would you miss if you used tcsh instead (what I've been using)?
> 
> I'm always willing to be convinced to try something better.
> 
I was a tcsh user before switching to zsh.  But I was raised on the
Bourne Shell, and used Korn shell a lot in the 90s.  The C-shell versions
of control flow commands always tripped me up, even though they're
arguably more sane -- just because the sh versions flow off the
fingertips.  So sh-compatibility was my main reason, but I like the
features of csh that zsh cherry-picked.
-- 
Sterling (Chip) Camden | camdensoftware.com | chipstips.com | chipsquips.com