Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!cwns1!chet
From: chet@cwns1.CWRU.EDU (Chet Ramey)
Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug
Subject: Re: piping error output in Bash 1.04
Keywords: bash
Message-ID: <1990Jan3.001743.3636@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>
Date: 3 Jan 90 00:17:43 GMT
References: <5877@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Reply-To: chet@po.CWRU.Edu
Organization: Case Western Reserve Univ. Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Lines: 24

In article <5877@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> lupton@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Robert Lupton) writes:

>	foo |& bar

>I'd like to see this added, but Brian says that he's unconvinced. I see no
>reason not to add it, although you can of course achieve the same thing
>if you can remember where to put all of the &'s. As an ex-csh user, I'd
>like the compatibilotyu and consistency. What do you think?

It's so easy to do it with the regular bash features that I don't think the
extra code is warranted:

foo 2>&1 | bar

I think csh compatibility should not be a goal.  Bash is not csh; it's not
even a csh clone.  I think ksh compatibility should be a goal (the useful
features of ksh, that is).

Chet Ramey
-- 
Chet Ramey
Network Services Group				"Help! Help! I'm being
Case Western Reserve University			 repressed!"
chet@ins.CWRU.Edu