The article is a bit confused about whether it's making a case for shell scripting in general, or for the Bourne Again shell in particular. By the looks of thi

The article is a bit confused about whether it's making a case for shell scripting in general, or for the Bourne Again shell in particular. By the looks of things, its target readership is people who don't use shell scripting, or interactive shells, at all; so the former case would be more appropriate, and the drawing of a distinction between the Bourne Again, Friendly Interactive, Z, and other shells just muddies the waters for that readership.