Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Janis Papanagnou Newsgroups: comp.unix.shell Subject: Re: coprocs - again (Was: Different variable assignments) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 07:03:07 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 07:03:08 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="b076f93abfd6a512a74043549fa9a9df"; logging-data="3208841"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19mRLxHC+2SJmtKwh3m5HLj" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 Cancel-Lock: sha1:t9wmcROn+11O4eK+8KNVOJMXNyE= In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1110 Bytes: 2225 On 25.10.2024 06:35, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 06:26:14 +0200, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > >> I meant that you can have several asynchroneous processes started which >> are each connected to the same main shell session with pipes for >> communicating. For that you have to redirect the default pipe channels >> because there's of course just one option '-p' with the commands 'read' >> and 'print' and you need some way to differentiate the various channels. > > Bash does that in a nicer way. For multiple co-processes you may be right. (I certainly differ given how Bash implemented it, with all the question that arise.) And I already said: I don't think it makes much sense to discuss subjective valuations. But my response was anyway just countering the (wrong) opinion that it would not be possible in Ksh. There's no more to be said on my part. Janis