3 ms·
At work, in the scope of a migration from RHEL 6 to rhEL 7, I have spend a lot of time migrating scripts from ksh (pdksh) to bash in order to remove this depend
by webreac 9y ago
At work, in the scope of a migration from RHEL 6 to rhEL 7, I have spend a lot of time migrating scripts from ksh (pdksh) to bash in order to remove this dependency. I have not seen any advantage of ksh over bash. There are many differences (ksh is less strict), but IMO there is no point in keeping 2 mostly similar but incompatible shells when less and less people are using shell. I think ksh should die. Maybe I am missing something ?
- derekp7 9y agoThe biggest benefit of real ksh, to me, is that variables don't disappear in weird cases, such as: cat file |\ while read stuff do other stuff; set variable done In ksh93, variables set within the while loop stay around outside of it. Whereas bash will run the while loop in a forked sub process.
- sli 9y agoThat just sounds like (practically speaking, if not totally accurately) local scoping.
- chasil 9y agoThere are TONS of advantages to ksh93 over bash. -Floating point math, not just integer -Coprocess syntax that is correct and compliant -Genuine Korn retains variables in control structures -Lots more, detailed in the Korn & Bolsky ksh93 book The language specification for ksh93 is large and powerful, and bash doesn't approach it.