[x-unix]from tcsh to bash

[~flipper]

john harrold wrote:

>   ... the reason that tcsh was dropped in favor of bash is that the prime
>   engineering advocate for tcsh left Apple ... and all of the "new hires"
>   had Linux backgrounds, not Unix.
>
>| As for shells... it's simple, a shell you're familiar with will allow
>| you to finish your work and spend time with your kids (or whatever)
>| while someone who is 'shifting' to whatever's newer or 'better' is
>| still configuring theirs. Pick a shell, any shell, learn it, stick
>| with it, and ignore the 'noise'.
>
>This argument could easily be extended to operating systems. Why not just
>stick with Windows? You can write your reports in word and read your email
>--- all that Mac and Linux stuff is just noise anyway :).

Ha ha, that noise you hear? Does it sound like Doritos being 
washed-down with Mountain Dew? That's the Linux guy. :)

I can make the same noise on a Mac.

Seriously, I didn't mean to imply that the writer should 'take 
whatever was dished out', just that it doesn't hurt to actually get 
in and learn one of the shells first. I see a lot of osts in various 
places where guys want to debate the most arcane features of various 
shells, and in the end they use none of those specific features, 
anyway. (The ones 'asking', the ones 'advocating' are all correct in 
terms of their own requirements, obviously.)

I like the tcsh and I like Eudora. heheh, why? Because I use them. 
How's that for 'science'? But I won't recommend either on principle*. 
Why? because the fact they work perfectly for me is no guarantee of 
anything for someone else.

*That 'example' was in no way equating the code-writing and 
functionality of tcsh with the, erm, email app.

~flipper