3 ms·

Using `cat file.txt | ...` has always felt more natural to me, so I still use it. If I need to build a long command I've been using the excellent `up` tool to

• REDS1736 2y ago
  Wow that looks amazing, thanks for telling me about this!
  • agumonkey 2y ago
    Indeed. A good addition to fzf and bat
• latexr 2y ago
  > Using `cat file.txt | ...` has always felt more natural to me Use whatever you prefer¹, but if what you care for is the logic of reading left to right, you can do so without `cat` by doing instead `< file.txt | ...` ¹ It’s absurd this needs to be spelled out, but here we are.
  • oneeyedpigeon 2y ago
    They're saying they find "cat" more natural than "<" which I can understand. Unless you regularly use "<", it's probably easier to remember "cat" and it's more self-documenting.
    • latexr 2y ago
      > They're saying they find "cat" more natural than "<" which I can understand. I don’t think that’s what they’re saying. I think they’re making the point that going left to right with the file first is what makes sense to them, as opposed to `... < file.txt`.
      • oneeyedpigeon 2y ago
        You're assuming they don't know about `<file.txt ...` That may be the case, but I can still see an argument for "cat" being more natural than "<" in this context.
        • latexr 2y ago
          > You're assuming they don't know about `<file.txt ...` And you’re assuming they do. It’s safe to assume at least one person reading the comment won’t know about the feature, the information is useful to more than that poster. > but I can still see an argument for "cat" being more natural than "<" in this context. You’re also assuming I don’t understand that sentiment. That has nothing to do with my original post. I don’t care what you use, do whatever makes you happiest. I was merely offering an alternative that would still satisfy what I perceived to be the original point (command piping left to right) to share knowledge, I was in no way criticising their method or saying they shouldn’t use it. This is a useless conversation.
  • knighthack 2y ago
    I don't care about fancy '<' syntaxes. I want to type 'cat'. The visual imagery of summoning a cute cat to do my POSIX sorcery trumps all else.
    • latexr 2y ago
      > I want to type 'cat'. Then do. I’m certainly not stopping you, or saying you’re wrong to do it. I offered an alternative with no judgement for the other method.
    • kazinator 2y ago
      Since when can you summon a real cat using the word cat? Or any word?
  • Arcuru 2y ago
    No I can't. Because I use fish shell. `cat` can also be a single character if you alias it :)