[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IFS handling and read
From: |
Marc Herbert |
Subject: |
Re: IFS handling and read |
Date: |
Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:21:33 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) |
Chris F.A. Johnson a écrit :
> Why should it be the last element of a pipeline that is executed in
> the current shell and not the first?
Because that's POSIX' choice?
Because the last element is the last one in the data stream. So it feels
more natural to get everything from the last element rather than side
effects from the first and stdout from the last.
> Suppose that I have a group of commands that sets some variables
> and outputs information to the screen, for example (this is much
> oversimplified):
Thanks for the example. I find this less common than using "read".
- Re: IFS handling and read, (continued)
- Re: IFS handling and read, Chris F.A. Johnson, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Lhunath (Maarten B.), 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Chris F.A. Johnson, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Chet Ramey, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Lhunath (Maarten B.), 2009/11/30
- Message not available
- Re: IFS handling and read, Jan Schampera, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Andreas Schwab, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Marc Herbert, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Lhunath (Maarten B.), 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, Chris F.A. Johnson, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read,
Marc Herbert <=
- Re: IFS handling and read, Greg Wooledge, 2009/11/30
- Message not available
- Re: IFS handling and read, pk, 2009/11/30
- Re: IFS handling and read, pk, 2009/11/30