Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!hplabs!hp-sdd!ucsdhub!celit!dave
From: dave@fps.com (Dave Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.visual,comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: dataflow shell
Message-ID: <4111@celit.fps.com>
Date: 20 Nov 89 22:22:16 GMT
References: <13770@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> <7000@ficc.uu.net> <1989Nov17.040858.22886@rpi.edu> <3907@celit.fps.com> <0207@sheol.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@fps.com
Reply-To: dave@fps.com (Dave Smith)
Followup-To: comp.lang.visual
Organization: FPS Computing Inc., San Diego CA
Lines: 17

In article <0207@sheol.UUCP> throopw@sheol.UUCP (Wayne Throop) writes:
 >
 >Well, ugly as the bourne shell syntax for these things is, and limited
 >as it is (it can't for example produce two dataflows between just two
 >processes, nor a circular dataflow, nor many others), it IS ALREADY a
 >start.  Why not start using it, and expand on it by writing pipe
 >fittings as needed, like the "split" option of grep, or the "join"
 >option of diff, and others? 

Because writing the spiffy graphical interface is a whole lot more fun
than writing dataflow Bourne shell scripts.  :-)

--
David L. Smith
FPS Computing, San Diego
ucsd!celerity!dave or dave@fps.com
"I'm trying to think, but nothing happens!" - Curly Fine