Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!smsc.sony.com!dce
From: dce@smsc.sony.com (David Elliott)
Newsgroups: gnu.bash.bug
Subject: Re: piping error output in Bash 1.04
Keywords: bash
Message-ID: <1990Jan3.182805.2370@smsc.sony.com>
Date: 3 Jan 90 18:28:05 GMT
References: <5877@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Reply-To: dce@Sony.COM (David Elliott)
Organization: Sony Microsystems Corp.
Lines: 39

In article <5877@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> lupton@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Robert Lupton) writes:
>Bash supports the csh style redirection of both error and stdout to a file:
>	foo >& bar
>but not 
>	foo |& bar
>	
>I'd like to see this added, but Brian says that he's unconvinced.

"Unconvinced"?

Well, I guess I can make a couple of statements on this:

1. Both > and | are forms of redirection.  In fact, "> filename" can be
   generalized to "| put_in_file filename".  Since they do similar jobs,
   they should have similar syntax.

2. It's convenient to be able to change the line

	foo >& bar

   to

	foo |& baz

   with the line editor.  It's not as convenient to have to change it
   to

	foo | baz 2>&1

3. If bash is going to emulate csh, it needs to emulate it in all
   areas.  Doing just part of the job is not just inconvenient, it's
   confusing.

Maybe Brian could give reasons for his objections?
-- 
David Elliott
dce@smsc.sony.com | ...!{uunet,mips}!sonyusa!dce
(408)944-4073
"But Pee Wee... I don't wanna be the baby!"