csh vs sh (was: fixing rm *)

[Guy Harris]

>CSH:
>   2X faster (on the only benchmark we attempted)

Err, umm, it's been *slower* on the things I tried; of course, the
Bourne shell in question was an S5 Bourne shell, so it had things like
"echo" and "test"/"[" built in (and may have just generally been faster).

>SH:
>   portable to Berkeley and ATT installations

That's the main benefit I see, and is the high-order bit for me.