Ammonite Shell vs sh
When comparing Ammonite Shell vs sh, the Slant community recommends sh for most people. In the question“What are the best Bash replacements?” sh is ranked 8th while Ammonite Shell is ranked 14th. The most important reason people chose sh is:
It may not be the best if you want power, but if you want to write a POSIX script that will run everywhere, it's a pretty good choice.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Powerful
Can call any 3rd party executable or use any Maven library.
Pro Easy to automate any task
When bash scripts start being complex, they can be converted to Ammonite.
Pro Tab completion
Pro Well documented
Pro Truely the most broadly available shell
It may not be the best if you want power, but if you want to write a POSIX script that will run everywhere, it's a pretty good choice.
Pro Most influential Unix shell alongside csh
Bourne shell introduced features such as piping, here documents, command substitution, variables, control structures for condition-testing and looping and filename wildcarding.
Cons
Con Uses JVM and more memory than regular shells
Con Not suitable for interactive use
The Bourne shell has always been criticized (most notably by Bill Joy, author of csh) as being unfriendly for interactive use.
It has no tilde (~) expansion. Limited file test operators. Limited math operators.