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

Tom Tromey
2002-07-23T20:18:29Z

>>>>> "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.

Tom