Re: RFA: >, >>, and "tee" operators

[Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>]

On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 02:24:15PM -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> writes:
> 
> >> transcript > FILE
> >> transcript >> FILE
> >> transcript | COMMAND
> 
> Daniel> I don't like this syntax very much.  It looks too much like
> Daniel> dumping the output of a command ("transcript") to the file,
> Daniel> not like a redirection for the future output.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> Daniel> Also - is piping to a command actually useful?
> 
> I don't know.  I haven't even been running with this patch in place,
> since the feature in general is only occasionally useful to me.  I
> thought I saw a request for this (piping to a command)?
> 
> Daniel> Hmm...  How do you feel about:
> Daniel> 	transcript [-append] FILE
> Daniel> 	tee [-append] FILE
> Daniel> Where transcript replaces ">" and ">>"?
> 
> That looks good to me.  Or even `transcript [-tee] [-append] FILE'.
> Or maybe `[-notee]', with tee as the default.

I'd rather have tee as the default, also.  But -notee doesn't look
right, so I left it as two commands.  Anyone else out on the list have
a suggestion?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer