[PD] popen vs shell bug

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Jul 2, 2010, at 3:47 AM, Pedro Lopes wrote:

> >   #!/bin/bash
> >   echo "this goes to stdout"
> >   echo "this goes to stderr" 1>&2
> >(Which should have been obvious from the familiar "pd -stderr 2>&1")
>
> Yep I use a similar trick in UNIX find, like trying to find .pd files:
> - find / -name "*.pd*" -type f -print 2>/dev/null
>
>
> >I am thinking of the ideal version of this, an object that would  
> give you an inlet for STDIN then two >outlets for STDOUT and STDERR,  
> plus a status outlet and an inlet to set what to run.  It could be  
> >something like this:
>
> >[process /usr/bin/python]
>
> >Then you could send python bits to it via the first inlet, and  
> receive the reply via the outlets.  So >something like a cleaner  
> [shell].
>
> NIce hc. That's an interesting object, sending messages in a simple  
> way to a shell process running in the background should be fairly  
> easy. Just didn't get what you mean by status outlet..


Want to implement it? :-D  The status outlet would give you info like  
the name of the process running, whether its still running, etc.

.hc




----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Programs should be written for people to read, and only incidentally  
for machines to execute.
  - from Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs