3 ms·
the <(...) syntax seems to be what I was looking for, passing a stream/pipeline to a function where a filename was expected. Hey, you learn something every day.
by qwertyuiop924 11y ago
the <(...) syntax seems to be what I was looking for, passing a stream/pipeline to a function where a filename was expected. Hey, you learn something every day.
EDIT: Unless you're just piping both of them to STDIN. piping two files to STDIN is useful, just not as useful as the thing that I wanted. This seems to be what you're doing.
- dllthomas 11y agoIt sets up a fifo, and passes in one end of it by name: $ echo <(:) <(:) /dev/fd/63 /dev/fd/62 So yeah, should be what you want for that use case :) As I mentioned though, it's a bashism.
- qwertyuiop924 11y agoNow I'm going to have to build a portable version of that. It shouldn't be too hard.