Re: [TUHS] Origin year of BSD csh?

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 01:32:23PM -0500, Ronald Natalie wrote: How interesting, I will try to bother you (perhaps directly) about in-depth informations :-) I've always been intrigued by the fact that traditional Bourne shell and Almquist shell haven't implemented history or command line editing. I found two interesting references about this: - Ash announcement, "A reimplementation of the System V shell": "I conclude by listing a few features that I have omitted intentionally. 3. History. It seems to me that the csh history mechanism is mostly a response to the deficiencies of UNIX terminal I/O. Those of you running 4.2 BSD should try out atty (which I am posting to the net at the same time as ash) and see if you still want history." - From an article from D. Korn, "ksh - An Extensible High Level Language": "Originally the idea of adding command line editing to ksh was rejected in the hope that line editing would move into the terminal driver. However, when it became clear that this was not likely to happen soon, both line editing modes were integrated into ksh and made optional so that they could be disabled on systems that provided editing as part of the terminal interface." I believe it's a real pity that it hasn't been implemented in terminal drivers in general. Or do I overlook possible disadvantages? What could be downsides, apart from possibly inconsistent behaviour across systems? Sven