[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ash vs. bash



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 21 Jul 1999 19:09:48 -0400, Raul Miller wrote:

>(1) it's easier to learn a language that you can use interactively than
>one that only works in some "file at a time" mode.

    This is an opinion.  I simply counter with mine.  I find that one that
goes through a file is easier to learn than one that does not.  My experience
with perl (which I know) versus sh/ash/tcsh/bash/zsh (which I do not know) as
well as MUSH coding on a MUSH versus MUSH coding in a file and preprocessing
into something usable.

    IE, just because something is interactive doesn't mean it is easier to
learn.

>(2) it's often convenient to write a short script at the command line to
>accomplish some one-off task.  [If I'm doing a task a lot, I'll gradually
>accrete a set of tools dedicated to that task.  Early on they're purely
>interactive commands, then short aliases and maybe small scripts, and
>once I've formalized the work I might write a dedicated program or set
>of programs for the task.]

    Again, an opinion.  I really see no difference than writing a quick thing
at the prompt versus writing a quick script.  Well, I do.  when I screw up on
the prompt I have to really look to see what the problem is, maybe even
retyping large portions because of a lack of decent editing.


- -- 
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
- -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.0 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc

iQA/AwUBN5Zl+Hpf7K2LbpnFEQJGeACffYTuad5+MJVhbxm3dar7XxLprSMAoKRk
ICpKOjbcFKDQUKSKFgc0Pt7J
=lwWe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: