Hi, As far as I understand, since fish do not use subshells, but executes functions in the same thread, it can not run functions in the background. I do not know, if there exist is a simple way to implement background functions.
A partial workaround is to run a new fish instance to simulate a real subshell: fish -c 'q 10s'& fish -c 'q 3s' & Of course this way is a bit limiting: the subfish will 'see' only exported and universal variables and only saved functions. Maxim On Sat, 21 Jul 2012 08:48:21 +0800, Steven Hum <sdot...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, it is weird. A better (?) function illustrating the problem is > > function q; echo $argv;sleep $argv;echo $argv;end > q 10s&; q 3s&;q 6s& > 10s > 10s > 3s > 3s > 6s > 6s > Job 3, “q 6s&” has ended > Job 2, “q 3s&” has ended > Job 1, “q 10s&” has ended > > The sequence should be job 2,3,1, yet the function calls are completed > in sequence (with observed delays) 10s, 3s and 6s rather than yielding > > 10s > 3s > 6s > 3s > 6s > 10s > > Using ".. ;and ... ;and ... &" to join statements would still only > process the last command in background and not the block of commands - > yielding results similar to above. > > Steven > -- > On Fri, 20 Jul 2012 at 03:15pm, Philip Ganchev wrote: > >> On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Steven Hum <sdot...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I posted this in the github issues and don't mean to double post, but >> if >> > "...statement...&" is intended only to work for simple commands, e.g. >> > >> > sleep 10s&; sleep 3s&; sleep 6s& >> > >> > (silly example, I know!) then I can close the ticket as this may not >> be a bug >> > by design. >> > >> > What I found was, for functions, e.g. >> > >> > function q; echo $argv; sleep 10s; echo $argv; end >> > >> > and execute >> > >> > q 1 &; q 2 &; q 3 & >> > >> > the output is >> > >> > 1 >> > 1 >> > 2 >> > 2 >> > 3 >> > 3 >> > Job 3, “q 3 &” has ended >> > Job 2, “q 2 &” has ended >> > Job 1, “q 1 &” has ended >> [...] >> >> This is very surprising to me. I'm curious about the rationale here. I >> would expect the output: >> >> 1 >> 2 >> 3 >> 1 >> Job 1, “q 1 &” has ended >> 2 >> Job 2, “q 2 &” has ended >> 3 >> Job 3, “q 3 &” has ended >> >> > If there is a correct "fish" way of spawning background function >> processes, my >> > second question is: is there a way to spawn a block of commands in >> background >> > similar to POSIX "(command1 && command2 && command3...) &". I tried >> "begin; >> > ...statements...; end &" but fish does not like that either (not >> surprisingly >> > given the above!) >> >> command1; and command2; and command3 >> >> [...] > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Live Security Virtual Conference > Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and > threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions > will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware > threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ > _______________________________________________ > Fish-users mailing list > Fish-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list Fish-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
