FAQ
- Aren't there better...
Yes, but I wanted to try out CUSE myself.
What better argument is there to create this piece of code anyway?
Anyway: the "arent't there better...' FAQ:
- Aren't there better alternatives? Like the `yes' command?
`yes' isn't suitable for binary data.
- Then wouldn't a `binyes' which reads the pattern from stdin
and then 'yesses' it to stdout be still better?
Sometimes. Many shells support syntax like: exec 7<>some_file
But bash for example, unlike plan9 rc, does not do: exec 7<>(cmd)
Bash4 may have the 'coproc' feature for this, but it seems to be
widely unknown, and: what about sh/dash/csh?
I bet zsh can do the whole thing by itself though.
Read tests/binyes-bash4.sh for a coproc example.
- `binyes' using FIFOs?
Yes, if you create temporary FIFOs rather than using one FIFO for
all, to avoid race conditions in opening the write and read ends.
However it is generally uglier to use temporary files than simply
opening a pipe - using /dev/pattern as a file, or binyes as a
`coproc'.
If you really do not have any 'exec' construct though, FIFOs are
either ugly to use, or you use subshell constructs, in which case
some local variables can be a pita to get out into the main
process... read tests/binyes-fifo.sh