> That's the point is that it's up to the shell to make sure that you don't use your work if you do the wrong thing. And how do you envision this would work in

> That's the point is that it's up to the shell to make sure that you don't use your work if you do the wrong thing. And how do you envision this would work inside a non-interactive Bash script? A shell option or environment variable that removes the confirmation step? With alternative syntax this would indeed work, because then it’s explicit. > this one command says "I'm going to make your pipeline terminate, this step will be un-pipeable." And your method would work like tee and not only write to the file, but also pass it on to the next step in the pipe? If not, the pipe still terminates at that point.