ajbrouw@neabbs.UUCP (ALBERT-JAN BROUWER) (11/20/90)
Pete Goodeve writes: > I got close to it earlier, when I noted that there "aren't many filters > in AmigaDOS", but I didn't follow the implication. Heck, there're hardly > ANY! How many of the standard command set will process Standard-Input to > Standard-Output? Exactly. Have a look at my "TinyTools" distribution. It appeared on comp.sources.amiga a month or two back, featuring among other things; Tee - You know Clip - Clip and pass the useable parts out of lines being piped in. PForm - Like List's LFormat, insertable anywere in the pipe stream. > Sure, we can write programs that behave as filters, and there are some unix > imports that do -- 'compress' filters like a champ, and I suppose grep does > too (haven't checked) -- but I wonder if that's the best way to do it > anyway. > (.... musing about alternative amiga specific syntax ....) You forget that about half of the Amigoids that need to use unnamed pipes are already doing so the conventional way, be it through ARP, or WShell or etc... -Albert Ploder Coder --- hp4nl!rulcvx!rooijen // hp4nl!neabbs!ajbrouw
pete@violet.berkeley.edu (Pete Goodeve) (11/24/90)
In <483845@neabbs.UUCP> (20 Nov), ALBERT-JAN BROUWER (ajbrouw@neabbs.UUCP) writes: > You forget that about half of the Amigoids that need to use unnamed pipes > are already doing so the conventional way, be it through ARP, or WShell > or etc... > Um, that statistic sounds about as reliable as the Arbitron ratings (:-)). It again though is peripheral to the main point. By "conventional", you mean "the way unix does it". The question we have been trying to toss around is whether we can provide a more flexible system. I think it is obvious by now that there are a lot of interesting possibilities. -- Pete --