From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-users-return-20959-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 6646 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2015 21:19:17 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Users List <zsh-users.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-users@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-users-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 20959
Received: (qmail 3849 invoked from network); 14 Nov 2015 21:19:13 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=T/C1EZ6Q c=1 sm=1 tr=0
 a=2HRJbREI7CNh35z1D4ZSNQ==:117 a=2HRJbREI7CNh35z1D4ZSNQ==:17 a=N659UExz7-8A:10
 a=vUIEj0Yygf-mQPxAA20A:9 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10
Message-id: <5647A54F.6090904@eastlink.ca>
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 13:19:11 -0800
From: Ray Andrews <rayandrews@eastlink.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0
MIME-version: 1.0
To: zsh-users@zsh.org
Subject: Re: capturing stderr to variable.
References: <5646B5F8.3090702@eastlink.ca>
 <CAHYJk3TL6oo4N1+XPr1VsHNThf7pn4SL+2vfsWmM2z6Ttv9T2g@mail.gmail.com>
 <151114000101.ZM611@torch.brasslantern.com> <56476D72.6010006@eastlink.ca>
 <151114110209.ZM1687@torch.brasslantern.com>
In-reply-to: <151114110209.ZM1687@torch.brasslantern.com>
Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

On 11/14/2015 11:02 AM, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> On Nov 14,  9:20am, Ray Andrews wrote:
> }
> } > 	{ highlight ... >/dev/tty } 2>&1 | read highlight_err
> } >
> } Well that sure beats some of the solutions I found on the net.  The only
> } think obscure there is why redirecting stdout to where it's going anyway
> } does anything.
>
> It's equivalent to opening the same file twice.
>   
> } Speaking of obscurites, have you given any thought to that cloning of
> } the environment thing I mentioned a while  back?
>
> I'd have to see the entire output of "set" rather than just the result
> of grepping it.  (And it'd be preferable that you not post that to the
> list ...)
>
Ok, if you want to pursue it I'll send it privately.