Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Command Languages Versus Programming Languages
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2024 18:00:16 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <871q7ssfdr.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <uu54la$3su5b$6@dont-email.me> <uu624j$792q$1@dont-email.me> <uu7a2m$ghfn$4@dont-email.me> <uu7i13$im9b$1@dont-email.me> <87il14si3a.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <uu7nig$jpe8$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:00:19 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="55d3bec1253354bc3d638b21ffa9fc4c"; logging-data="647597"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19wNnLHJ6snM6UoUaiKKEZ7"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:R3UWW45dnGZD/4U1+5Ea6Mf4mHY= sha1:9Tn1n8QUWgYEmpxoYbJcOtrZbIQ=
Xref: csiph.com comp.unix.shell:24850 comp.unix.programmer:15598 comp.lang.misc:10271

Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
[...]
> I can see a point where people use for interactive use other shells
> than for programming; like tcsh (interactively) and bash (programming),
> because of the powerful features tcsh supports. Since the increase of
> interactive features supported by the shells that are typically used
> for programming I prefer to have the same shell with same syntax and
> features for both, and to be able to pass code from one application
> context to the other.

Indeed.  I spent several years using tcsh interactively (because it had
a few interactive features that I found convenient) and bash for writing
scripts (previously I had actually written *gasp* csh and tcsh scripts).
Eventually I found that using a single shell for both was easier, and
that bash's interactive features are about as good as tcsh's.  (And I
can write complex nested commands on one line, something I probably
wouldn't have attempted in [t]csh even if it were possible.)  I haven't
looked back.

zsh has some nice features, but I haven't learned it well enough to
consider switching.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
Working, but not speaking, for Medtronic
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */