gt; An: picolisp@software-lab.de
> Betreff: Re: write from pl-script into named pipe on shell
>
> Hi Olaf,
>
> > Println is not the key, I also played around with flush and sync and tell
> > and every word I saw in rosetta examples :-)
>
> It seems the bash is not fast e
Hi Olaf,
> Println is not the key, I also played around with flush and sync and tell
> and every word I saw in rosetta examples :-)
It seems the bash is not fast enough. At least it works if I put (wait 1000)
between the calls to (out "listener" ..).
This still does not really make sense to me,
Thank you for the quick answer, Alex.
Println is not the key, I also played around with flush and sync and
tell and every word I saw in rosetta examples :-)
But no problem at all - enjoy the weekend :-)
Another approach was to have all different senders and the one receiver
in one picolisp
Hi Olaf,
just a wild guess, I'm too lazy ATM to try:
> == hey.l ==
> (out "listener" (print 'tput "clear"))
> (out "listener" (print 'tput "cup" 3 15))
> (out "listener" (print 'echo "hey"))
Should it not be 'println' instead of 'print', so that the shell gets a newline
delimiter?
♪♫ Alex
--
Hi all,
if someone has fun with this question, I would appreciate an answer.
I creat a named pipe in a terminal window and start a simple listener loop:
==bash==
mknod listener p
while true
do
read line In a second terminal window (same working directory) sending from pil
repl commands to
