From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-42711-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 25276 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 2018 11:31:07 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:zsh-workers-unsubscribe@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 42711
Received: (qmail 28921 invoked by uid 1010); 24 Apr 2018 11:31:07 -0000
X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from kahlil.inlv.org by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from <martijn@inlv.org>, uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 
 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1.  
 Clear:RC:0(37.59.109.123):SA:0(-1.9/5.0):. 
 Processed in 1.984707 secs); 24 Apr 2018 11:31:07 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) 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=3.4.1
X-Envelope-From: martijn@inlv.org
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: |
X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: |
Subject: Re: [BUG] process substitution breaks when nested or traverses a
 function
To: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
References: <CGME20180421093602epcas1p4c7f4182661b42fa2e477f8fe61a3e132@epcas1p4.samsung.com>
 <CA++-COyOYiE_snQeLB_jsDmWAvne9bjS7GWnA28mPNwTeVo0kg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180424104335.24dfe68e@camnpupstephen.cam.scsc.local>
 <1524565816.2838053.1348774976.23F51BA1@webmail.messagingengine.com>
 <20180424114717.23a00f3c@camnpupstephen.cam.scsc.local>
From: Martijn Dekker <martijn@inlv.org>
Message-ID: <8d21cc5b-7e12-ff70-a9c1-1eb9973b492d@inlv.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 13:09:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180424114717.23a00f3c@camnpupstephen.cam.scsc.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-GB
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Op 24-04-18 om 12:47 schreef Peter Stephenson:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2018 10:30:16 +0000
> Daniel Shahaf <d.s@daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> I don't know about "better", but I'd looked into this and wondered why
>> getproc() had two compile-time alternative implementations, one with
>> mkfifo() and one with /proc/self.  Is this just about portability,
>> or...?
> 
> Using a file descriptor is neater, because there's less cruft in the
> regular file system to clear up (and fewer associated security worries
> etc. etc.); however, /proc/self isn't guaranteed to be available on
> older systems, whereas FIFOs have been around for a good quarter
> century.

/proc/self (or /proc in general) is not available on some very much 
current systems either, including at least macOS and OpenBSD.

/dev/fd is available on both of those, though.

- M.