Questions concerning BaSH

[Matt Day]

In article <1991Jan10.183056.20614 at spool.cs.wisc.edu> bothner at sevenlayer.cs.wisc.edu (Per Bothner) writes:
>tcsh is ok, but it is a bit of a kludge, and it requires csh
>source. Also, I would advise against writing major macros
>or programs using [t]csh, given that the Posix standard
>(and ksh and bash) are based on Bourne shell syntax.

There are plans to rewrite the parts of the csh that under AT&T Copyright,
so the csh and the tcsh could be freely distributed under the Berkeley
copyright.  It is true, that the Bourne shell is the standard, but I would
only recommend writing Bourne shell scripts if you need to be portable to
stupid systems that don't have csh.  For your personal day-to-day shell
activity, I find the tcsh a much better choice than the Bourne shell
variants.
-- 
- Matt Day, Sanyo/Icon, mday at iconsys.icon.com || uunet!iconsys!mday