Re: The joy of pipes

On 11/17/24 12:30 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 23:59:41 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
 

On 11/16/24 5:31 AM, Richard Kettlewell wrote:

>
“Temporary files the parent can access” is not a good model for a
couple of reasons:
>
* The semantics are different. Bytes read from a regular file are still
    there to be read again if you rewind the file; bytes read from a
    pipe are gone. Empty/full files behave differently to empty/full
    pipes.
>
* Temporary regular files can already be accessed by other processes by
    name, by file descriptor inheritance, or file descriptor passing.

>
Didn't say temp disk files were necessarily SUPERIOR, just that they
CAN do most of the stuff pipes are used for and in an easier
user/code-friendly fashion.

 Not really, no.
 

SIZE is almost unlimited too.

 That is another reason they don’t work.

   It's a block of info, just by one means over another.
   any sub-process/thread can write to a file as easily
   as a pipe. Just need a good naming scheme.
   But, as said, better to stick to pipes for most needs.
   If you're passing multi-megabyte pages of text/images
   or whatever back to the parent then you're doing
   something wrong. Don't hassle yer parents !  :-)