Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!uunet!shelby!rutgers!gatech!emory!skeeve!arnold
From: arnold@skeeve.UUCP (Arnold D. Robbins)
Newsgroups: unix-pc.general
Subject: ksh
Message-ID: <170@skeeve.UUCP>
Date: 1 Jun 89 00:28:13 GMT
Distribution: unix-pc
Organization: The Basement Computer, Atlanta GA
Lines: 30

>In article <4038@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> richard@uhccux.UUCP (Richard Foulk) 
>writes:
>|>Looks like another good reason to stick with csh.  !$ is easier to type
>|>and it displays the substitution so you know what's going on.

In article <711@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.islp.ny.us (Lenny Tropiano) writes:
>Well I found out in "vi-mode" you can do <ESC>_ and it will do exactly like
>the !$ in csh... so ksh is as good ;-)  I'm sure in emacs-mode there is
>an equivalent keystroke too..

There are about a zillion things you can do in ksh you can't do in csh.
I know of *no-one*, and have never heard reports of, anyone who has switched
back to csh from ksh.  Unix-pc people are out of luck, but, if you can get
ksh88, it can be compiled to do csh style {...,...} expansion, which is the
only feature of note that the csh still had.  Even the version of ksh that
comes with the Unix-PC, which is old, beats the heck out of any version
of the csh.

I have been using ksh for over 4 years, and wouldn't dream of trying to
use any other shell.  Dave Korn's book on ksh is available, and thoroughly
(if a bit dryly) documents both the programming language and the interactive
history interface.

In short, ksh is the only way to go.  Note: if you've never used ksh,
don't even bother trying to follow up to convince me otherwise.
-- 
"Crack-pot societies of all kinds sprang up everwhere, advocating everything
from absolutism to anarchy. Queer cults arose, preaching free love, the
imminent end of the world, and many other departures from the norm of thought."
E.E. "Doc" Smith, Children of the Lens, 1954 | Arnold Robbins, skeeve!arnold