Right I was thinking about that after I replied to your comment, that I let my point get away from me. I read so many other comments putting down bash I was pleading my case to them, not you, haha.
I did not realize dash was bourne compatible. Also, I'm curious what systems you've used didn't have bash installed by default, as I haven't used anything in a long long time that didn't have bash.
Re:Bash Academy
by peterwwillis on Tuesday December 15, 2015 @01:42PM
(#10739552)
Solaris, BSD, HPUX, hell even stripped-down Linux installs (though sometimes it exists and is just in a weird path). Occasionally I need to bootstrap an OS installer and they never have Bash.
By default I write Bourne, and if I need the extra complexity/speed/etc i'll switch to Bash, but it's pretty rare that I need to use Bashisms.
People are opposed to learning yet another tool. But here's the really funny thing about the "use a more robust language" argument: not only do they introduce more dependencies, they can introduce more bugs (due to increased complexity), and are almost always a maintenance headache. The one thing that's easy to maintain after 10 years is a shell script. Perl is a nightmare to maintain after 10 years (mostly due to the lack of good Perl programmers) and awk is just barely better.