6 Dec
2024
6 Dec
'24
10:46 p.m.
Dan Cross <crossd(a)gmail.com> wrote:
My claim is simply that extant shell syntax isn't
really amenable to
this in a natural way. As Chet and Arnold pointed out, process
substitution as pioneered in ksh gets us a little closer, but it's not
quite as general (I believe any such graphs would have to be acyclic);
it's certainly not as syntactically pleasant.
There has been work along these lines; I was sent a reference off-list
to a paper by Spinellis and Fragkoulis about a DAG-oriented shell:
https://www.spinellis.gr/sw/dgsh/, which seems relevant.
In the early-to-mid 1980s, the Georgia Tech Software Tools Subsystem
for Prime Computers offered three standard inputs, three standard
outputs, and a shell with syntax to connect things as you desired.
I don't remember the syntax though. I also don't know how much
this feature was really used.
Arnold