On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 10:23 PM Zachary Santer <zsan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 29, 2024 at 4:40 AM konsolebox <konsole...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > You can avoid pipe recursions by storing the output first in an array. > > So is this a known issue?
I don't know. I haven't really checked your issues. I just think avoiding too many opened pipes at the same time should be intuitive and it's likely going to fix whatever issue there is. > > There's also no need to use an error flag variable. Just make sure > > return calls are chained. > > The intention here is to report as many error conditions as possible > before exiting. You can print an error message before calling return. Are you planning to run more commands even if an error has already happened? > Filling an array of paths and then looping over it in a subsequent for > loop wouldn't actually be unreasonable here, considering how many > paths there are. It just feels like bad practice. Why do you think it's a bad practice? > There's always the > possibility of busting out the named pipes again. Bash 4.2 couldn't > wait for process substitutions. The solution I suggested doesn't use process substitution so I'm not sure what you mean. -- konsolebox
