4 ms·
Is there a simple way to process a list of files with this restriction? Something like `ls | xargs $(my-cli < $MAGIC_XARGS_VAR > $MAGIC_XARGS_VAR)`? I know tha
by happyslobro 10y ago
Is there a simple way to process a list of files with this restriction? Something like `ls | xargs $(my-cli < $MAGIC_XARGS_VAR > $MAGIC_XARGS_VAR)`?
I know that it could be done with a loop, but that's a little unwieldy compared to `ls | xargs my-cli`
- dllthomas 10y agoIf processing the list of files is equivalent to processing the concatenation of the list of files, then you can `ls | xargs cat | my-util`. If it is not, then as I argued in a cousin comment I think that's another good case to support accepting file names.
- okdana 10y ago>`ls | xargs cat | my-util` lol, this is really turning the whole 'useless use of cat' thing on its head.
- LukeShu 10y ago`cat` is short for conCATenate. Here it is being used to concatenate files. This is the canonical useful use of cat. The problem with that example is parsing `ls` output.
- marvy 10y agoso, how to avoid parsing ls? maybe use cat *, or something?
- LukeShu 10y agoIt really depends on what you are trying to accomplish. `cat -- *` might be the right choice. Maybe `find . -maxdepth 1 -type f -exec cat -- {} +`
- okdana 10y agoYes, that's what i was getting at. The use of `cat` isn't useless (for once) — the use of `ls` and `xargs` is.
- dllthomas 10y ago> The problem with that example is parsing `ls` output. Yeah, I left that alone to keep things simpler and was assuming `ls` was simply being used as short-hand for "some unspecified approach to outputting file names". In a context where hard-to-handle filenames are possible, you'd of course need to do something a little more robust.