zsh-workers
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
* Re: Bug report + feature request
@ 2000-10-06  8:24 Sven Wischnowsky
  2000-10-08  1:14 ` Process substitution Bart Schaefer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sven Wischnowsky @ 2000-10-06  8:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: zsh-workers; +Cc: sbeck


Sullivan N. Beck wrote:

> ...
> 
> Now for the feature request.  Since I'd actually like to separate and
> pipe STDOUT and STDERR separately to different commands (all of the
> above came about from various attempts to get this working) without
> resorting to fifos, intermediate files, etc., what I'd _really_ like to
> do is to be able to pipe different file descriptors similar to how I can
> redirect them to a file.  For example, I'd like to replace the following
> lines:
> 
>   COMMAND > /tmp/stdout 2> /tmp/stderr
>   cat /tmp/stderr | STDERR_COMMAND
>   cat /tmp/stdout | STDOUT_COMMAND
> 
> with the single line:
> 
>   COMMAND >| STDOUT_COMMAND 2>| STDERR_COMMAND
> 
> If this syntax isn't acceptable, that's fine with me.  Any syntax is
> fine.  I'd just like the functionality.

How should it find out if, in your example, STDERR_COMMAND should be
used for COMMAND or STDOUT_COMMAND?

But anyway... have you seen the >>(cmd) process substitution?
You can do:

  COMMAND >>(STDOUT_COMMAND) 2>>(STDERR_COMMAND)

or

  COMAMND 2>>(STDERR_COMMAND) | STDOUT_COMMAND

if you prefer.


Note to workers: in the info file, >>(foo) is shown as `> >(foo)'. Urgh.


Bye
 Sven


--
Sven Wischnowsky                         wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Process substitution
  2000-10-06  8:24 Bug report + feature request Sven Wischnowsky
@ 2000-10-08  1:14 ` Bart Schaefer
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Bart Schaefer @ 2000-10-08  1:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: zsh-workers

On Oct 6, 10:24am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote:
}
} Note to workers: in the info file, >>(foo) is shown as `> >(foo)'. Urgh.

That -is- the way it's parsed.  It works just fine to write it that way.

The nice thing would be if there were a way to wait for those jobs to
complete.  They run in the background (as they must, really) but they're
not entered into the job table.

BTW, it's fairly easy to get zsh to forget to delete a file created with
=(...).  Compare:

	cat <<<'bar' =(echo foo)		# temp file removed
	echo bar >> =(echo foo)			# temp file removed
	cat <<<'bar' >> =(echo foo)		# temp file remains

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net   


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2000-10-08  1:15 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2000-10-06  8:24 Bug report + feature request Sven Wischnowsky
2000-10-08  1:14 ` Process substitution Bart Schaefer

Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).