Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!amdahl!pyramid!prls!mips!dce
From: dce@mips.COM (David Elliott)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Ksh use (was Re: Should ``csh'' be part of ...)
Keywords: csh==Berkeley shell, should it be in System V or not?
Message-ID: <2199@quacky.mips.COM>
Date: 17 May 88 14:38:31 GMT
References: <2599@usceast.UUCP> <2601@usceast.UUCP> <4095@mtgzz.UUCP>
Reply-To: dce@mips.COM (David Elliott)
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 33

In article <4095@mtgzz.UUCP> avr@mtgzz.UUCP (XMRP50000[jcm]-a.v.reed) writes:
>
>Why would any sane person wish to use csh when they can use ksh?

The only reason I don't use ksh is that it appears to lack two features of
csh that I use every day.  Maybe you folks can help me out.

1. It's really nice to be able to say

	rcsdiff -r1.{2,4} foo.c

   Does ksh have anything like {}?  (In case you don't know, "-r1.{2,4}"
   expands to "-r1.2 -r1.4".)

2. Having used the csh history mechanism for nearly 8 years, I'm used
   to being able to do things like
	
	% foo bar
	...
	% ^oo^ob^		# change first foo to foob
	fob bar
	...
	% mv foo.c foo.c.old
	% !!:gs/foo/bar/	# change all foo to bar
	mv bar.c bar.c.old

I was told once that there was a ksh with a complete csh-style history
machanism.  Is this true?

Of course, I'm not completely insane, since I often go into sh to run
loops, and I write on sh scripts, never csh scripts.

-- 
David Elliott		dce@mips.com  or  {ames,prls,pyramid,decwrl}!mips!dce