Talk:User defined pipe and redirection operators: Difference between revisions
Talk:User defined pipe and redirection operators (view source)
Revision as of 10:43, 13 September 2011
, 12 years ago→Yet another task without a task
m (→Yet another task without a task: fix wikipedia link) |
|||
Line 11:
: I don't think the task wants any of the above. Seems the goal is to define stream-like objects where each one's output can be taken up by another as input, and the task's focus is to device a mechanism to drive data through such a chain. BTW, since data flows unidirectionally, it definitely does not require coroutines, all you need to do is have the object at the output end to pull data from upstream on-demand. The problem of the task: it's asking to much. Tail, head, uniq, sort, grep, wc, file io, subshell, redirect-in, redirect-out, pipe -- it's what, reliving 40 years of unix experience in a flash? --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 02:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
:: As a general rule, languages already implement routines where on object's output can be taken by another as input. In fact, it's hard to think of any language which implements objects which does not implement something like message passing. Even functional languages let you pass the output of one function to another function. So... that seems a bit trivial? And if you are going to require one of them starts before the other completes, that gets into time slicing or multiprocessing or co-routines? But some OS pipe implementations (*cough*windows*cough*) buffer the full output from one command before starting the next... --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 10:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Adhere to the syntax of the specific language where required, eg the use of brackets and names of operators.
| |||