On Sun, Jan 24, 2021 at 9:04 PM Bernhard Voelker <m...@bernhard-voelker.de> wrote: > > An off-tech argument: ask a local plumber if he'd would ever use > a tee piece instead of a pipe end piece. I guess he would only > if he wouldn't have anything else at hand.
According to POSIX, tee writes to "zero or more files."[1] So the "local plumber" analogy already doesn't hold, because a plumber would never put in a tee and then immediately cap it off so that the flow can only go to one place, but commands like `echo foo | tee | tee | tee` are already explicitly allowed. > A word to the proposed patch: what should happen, if the user does > not give a file? > A | B | tee -q > The patch just silently ignored that situation which feels wrong. Personally, I like the idea of only having to type `echo foo | tee -q` instead of `echo foo > /dev/null`, so I think the patch indeed does the right thing in that case. -Alex [1] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/tee.html
