who needs es..?

[alk@et.msc.edu (Anthony L. Kimball)]

es is my only shell -- except that I use sh to write production scripts
that may be used outside of my organization.  The reason is right in the
name: extensible.  

I link es with rdln.  I generally use it under an xterm running Laumann's
SCREEN, with or without an Emacs processes around the shell under the
SCREEN.  SCREEN or Emacs, either alone suffices to eliminate any need for
job control.  X does not suffice.

My complaints of es are slowness and lack of a contributed library, as well
as specific complaints relating to programmability.  es could be more like
Dylan.  If emacs could be recoded in es I'd be halfway to the sort of lispm-ish
environment I'll use in heaven.  I have no complaints about the size of es.
Now if only I could write loadable kernel modules in es...