>>at the risk of making a three-sided flame war, i don't particularly
>>like either one.  i think csh is the best command-line shell, but
>>even though sh is better for programming i prefer tclsh.  it has

How about size and loading time? sh has the advantage of being small,
so multiple scripts running at the same time don't eat your memory as
quickly.

>>tcl syntax is -much- easier than sh and csh.  (and P*L and R*X...)

I'll give you that. 

>How about bash ???
>It has sh, csh  & ksh features build in.

And therein lies the problem. I would source things in bash (since I
use it as my main shell) but the load time is largish, especially
compared to sh.

BASH is great as a command line shell, especially is you are an emacs
user.

>And command line completion / substitution.
csh has file name substitution at least. you'd need to set filec to
get it.
--
Hacksaw