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

Daniel Jacobowitz
2002-07-23T20:20:48Z

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