> 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
Actually plumbers do this all the time, its a stub out for future additions/alterations. There is also a special case of it done when plumbing air/gas lines called a trap. > 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 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-hack...@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > -- Rod Grimes rgri...@freebsd.org
