@mlody@lemmy.world
I used to be purely a KSH user …20+ years ago. At that point in time, if you were running a SysV-derived OS (for me, Irix and Solaris), it was hard to beat (and, if you invoked "POSIX shell" was KSH's were the semantics the shell implemented). That said, one of the bigger pain-points of KSH (back then) was that a lot of the default packagings were kind of rubbish: if you wanted to retain your sanity, you'd replace them with a KSH93 implementation. But it's been since my Solaris days ended that I've dicked with KSH (as the Linux implementations were often just BASH running in "compatibility mode" rather than Real KSH™ or PD-KSH).
If you're writing shell scripts, the features in recent BASH implementations make it a pretty solid choice.