Re: what's much better in eshell than eg tcsh?

[Xavier Maillard <xma@gnu.org>]

   Although this sounds like bait, I'll try to help you.

   dkcombs@panix.com (David Combs) writes:

   > I tried it once, a few years ago, and found it difficult,
   > maybe even unpleasant, to use.  Also never learned how
   > to do things I was used to do with tcsh.

   Eshell is for interactive use in Emacs.  It's more portable than say
   bash, if you don't want to install Cygwin.

   > And why better (for programming) than bourne?

   It's not.  Scripting in Eshell doesn't make any sense.  For that you'd
   simply use Lisp.

   Eshell, IMO, is nice because you can use familiar Emacs commands as
   shell commands, however, I get a lot more mileage out of just using
   dired and Emacs in command mode (as an editor) than in Eshell.  Eshell
   also mixes up parentheses and brackets, which I find slightly confusing.

I also tried several times to use eshell but I really prefer
eev-mode + M-x shell.

I highly recommend anybody to try eev-mode to see what it can do.

	Xavier
-- 
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.april.org
http://www.lolica.org