Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!sgi!shinobu!odin!sgihub!dragon!news
From: pdc@lunch.wpd.sgi.com (Paul Close)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sgi
Subject: Re: Korn shell vs tcsh shell
Message-ID: <1991Apr10.223719.4977@dragon.wpd.sgi.com>
Date: 10 Apr 91 22:37:19 GMT
References: <9104100710.AA23489@karron.med.nyu.edu>
Sender: news@dragon.wpd.sgi.com (CNews Account)
Reply-To: pdc@sgi.com (Paul Close)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc., Mountain View, CA
Lines: 15

karron@cmcl2.nyu.edu (Dan Karron) writes:
>How does the Korn shell, which costs money, compare to the tcsh shell, which
>is free ? What does each do that the other doesn't ?

The main difference is that the Korn shell is Bourne shell based, while tcsh
is csh based.  They both allow interactive command line editing, which is
their main bit of "value added" over the shells they are respectively based
on.  I'm not aware of any huge functionality gaps that exist between the two
shells.  I'm a former ksh user and current tcsh user, so I've experienced
both.  I use tcsh because I find csh easier to get by with than sh, which
are the two "stock" shells if I'm on a foreign system.
--
Paul Close	     pdc@sgi.com	   ...!{ames, decwrl, uunet}!sgi!pdc

    Oh, no!  You walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue.