Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.000 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:not': 0.03; 'output': 0.05; 'root': 0.05; 'differently': 0.07; 'modify': 0.07; 'subject:Error': 0.07; 'append': 0.09; 'arguments': 0.09; 'arguments,': 0.09; 'operator,': 0.09; 'skip:/ 10': 0.09; 'so?': 0.09; 'cc:addr:python-list': 0.11; 'python': 0.11; '13:07,': 0.16; 'argument.': 0.16; 'behave': 0.16; 'command.': 0.16; 'stdout': 0.16; 'superfluous': 0.16; 'sender:addr:gmail.com': 0.17; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'wed,': 0.18; 'input': 0.22; 'aug': 0.22; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.22; 'cc:2**0': 0.24; 'equivalent': 0.26; 'read,': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'function': 0.29; 'chris': 0.29; 'am,': 0.29; 'especially': 0.30; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'pipe': 0.31; 'maybe': 0.34; 'subject:the': 0.34; 'could': 0.34; 'something': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'version': 0.36; '14,': 0.36; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'wrong': 0.37; 'others.': 0.38; 'sure': 0.39; 'letters': 0.60; 'august': 0.61; 'matter': 0.61; 'simply': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'to:addr:gmail.com': 0.65; 'reads': 0.68; 'chuck': 0.84; 'quickest': 0.84; 'hate': 0.91; '2013': 0.98 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=DWCAtt9VBGmnKVeajwWlg70qyR3/lBbvBw3xVAHNfJo=; b=fzeUYlxh5SKoot0Ov0LGETV40PEXpChbjzU4Ma/46G8tGtuGqS3zH2wdihLI7Qik1x ehJbfnnG1QteO93/AmW0rTLgexttBrtt3j2xBF/Zwhog7axTNBxznG1WAAqHom11cvHP WEr3OcarEf6FtU7P5Al4iuXENf+Bsm2sNrKevGuoYbiAcisjIH5mNJS87jXzx3jxE5fU 9XMmdbQUyAEYhgsDXBiq5ZH2ZIX3wscqMY1+RnHR6gM2gebO4++/EAHSdv9crhrP0s5f J5D2y4tUBnvSZ1FthUlb0fKkDVxt9hYnVbriQ9a3H2upt+k8a/JOXnUDPl0KYhipcHEO o5EQ== X-Received: by 10.152.6.97 with SMTP id z1mr8410190laz.26.1376483706544; Wed, 14 Aug 2013 05:35:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: joshua.landau.ws@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: From: Joshua Landau Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 13:34:26 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 1DmrpUhVroVAZGesz6Bx4fXbAOk Subject: Re: Am I not seeing the Error? To: Chris Angelico Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: python-list X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 30 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1376483714 news.xs4all.nl 15991 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:36397 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:52511 On 14 August 2013 13:07, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Joshua Landau wrote: >> >> What's wrong with cat? Sure it's superfluous but what makes it *bad*? >> Personally I often prefer the pipe "cat x | y" form to "x < y"... or >> "< y x". > > What's the use of it, in that situation? Why not simply use > redirection? (Though you have the letters backward; "cat y | x" would > be the equivalent of your others. Typo, I assume.) You're forking a > process that achieves nothing, if your cat has just one argument. > > Of course, there ARE many good uses for cat. If you give it multiple > arguments, or if you have arguments that modify the output on the way > through (eg "cat -n"), then it's not the same as redirection. And some > programs behave differently if stdout is a tty, so the quickest way to > get the porcelain version of something is to append "|cat" to the > command. Or maybe you need to retrieve something that only root can > read, so you use "sudo cat /x/y/z|somescript". But if you could spell > it "x < y", then why not do so? Because "cat y | x" often reads nicer. It's the whole "input -> function -> function -> ... -> output" thing. I especially hate "y < input > output" which reads awfully not matter where you chuck the spaces. "cat input | y > output" however, is acceptable. Honestly I do think Python would do well to get a pipe operator, because in some circumstances it's just cleaner.