On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 10:06:28AM -1000, p...@pair.com wrote: > > I cannot say about the tcsh features.
That's kind of a shame, since tcsh is what I prefer these days, having
long since given up on bash (pretty much immediately after I started
using FreeBSD as my primary OS instead of bash, and realized I preferred
the csh-style syntax).
>
> I switched from bash to zsh mainly for excellent vi-mode editing
> support, more so over multiple lines. ksh & bash were horrible in
> that respect.
I've never really tried using vi-mode editing in any shell, despite the
fact I'm a constant vi user (even a vi gangsta, one might say). Maybe I
should some day. Thus far, though, I don't even know if tcsh supports
vi-mode editing.
>
> Recently I have found that regular expression like [a-d] (instead of
> {a,b,c,d}) in file name generation work as expected. zsh has more
> ways to help file name generation which I have not looked into yet.
>
> And of course, as stated earlier, compatibility between a bourne
> shell script & an interactive shell helps immensely while
> developing|debugging a script.
This is another area where I just haven't run into the need for that sort
of thing. When I use a regex at the command prompt, it's via grep,
basically -- I don't tend to get more fancy than something like globbing.
For scripting, I stick to sh and "real" programming languages like Perl
and Ruby. I'm not terribly clear on tcsh's regex support, and I guess if
I needed shell compatibility when writing a shell script (which, for me,
is usually just a batch file, perhaps with a little flow control and a
variable or two) I can always just start sh.
--
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
pgpX2htdvmoGH.pgp
Description: PGP signature
