Re: popen
- From: "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:52:30 -0400
"Evenbit" <nbaker2328@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3d517bc1-0295-4223-a60a-6553a0975632@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Jul 10, 6:21 am, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Good point. I thought 'less' killed 'more' on *nix...
Like so many other things, it still needs to be there for "backwards
compatibility" reasons. Linux is in the same boat as Windows...
Does your Cygwin have 'more'?
My DOS has 'more'. But, it's not *nix. My DJGPP has 'less'.
Did you try compiling/running my Nasm code under Cygwin?
No. Sorry, I don't currently have Cygwin, MinGW, Pelles C, or LCC-Win32
installed. I wasn't using them enough. And, I left Cygwin installed for a
few extra years since it's installation/package manager was _so_ messed
up...
Did the
piping part work?
popen etc. is emulated via files for DOS with DJGPP, but the asm isn't
likely to work for DOS, etc., due to incompatible interrupt calls.
Yes, the pipe is the key feature. The command line *nix pipe '|'
implementation is well used... and understood. But, p* function use,
AFAICT, seems uncommon both on *nix and elsewhere.
I would certainly have to disagree.
With? There's like five to seven things you could disagree with...
Piping to/from a spawned process
is a common question in forums.
Which would indicate it's not well understood or commonly used...
(But, don't take my word for it. Search for code with popen()...)
One doesn't always have the source
code for the process you want to use -- therefore, you can't use other
forms of interprocess communication.
ANSI freopen() and system(), anyone?
RP
.
- References:
- I pee in the open
- From: Evenbit
- Re: I pee in the open
- From: Frank Kotler
- Re: popen
- From: Rod Pemberton
- Re: popen
- From: Evenbit
- I pee in the open
- Prev by Date: Re: popen
- Next by Date: Re: popen
- Previous by thread: Re: popen
- Next by thread: Re: I pee in the open
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
