From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: will.senn@gmail.com (Will Senn)
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 09:38:03 -0600
Subject: [TUHS] redirection wildness in v7
In-Reply-To: <20171109150456.7D0B1203B0@orac.inputplus.co.uk>
References: <3c417dcc-d3b4-0128-737a-7e510c6d0ffc@gmail.com>
 <20171109150456.7D0B1203B0@orac.inputplus.co.uk>
Message-ID: <df51650b-96b0-c50f-e27c-7efdf2066270@gmail.com>

Hi Ralph,

This is a good answer. I thought it was great until I saw Dan's :).

I didn't realize that the open group standard was online and accessible. 
Thanks for the link.

Will

On 11/09/2017 09:04 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Will,
>
>> Why does the first of these incantations not present text, but the
>> second does (word is a file)? Neither errors out.
>>
>> $ <word | sed 20q
>> $ <word sed 20q
> That's still the case with modern-day sh(1).
>
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/V3_chap02.html#tag_18_09_01
> explains that a simple command doesn't need to result in a command name
> to execute.  In your first pipeline, there's nothing to copy the data
> from the first subshell's stdin redirected from ./word to the subshell's
> stdout that's pipes into sed's stdin.  Adding a command to do the copy
> works.
>
>      <word cat | sed 20q
>