[cc'ing bash, dash, mksh, and zsh developers; feel free to avoid cross-posted replies on content not relevant to all the groups] On 12/22/2011 08:39 AM, David Korn wrote: > Subject: Re: Re: [1003.1(2008)/Issue 7 0000530]: Support in-place editing in sed (-iEXTENSION) > -------- > > There are many commands other than sed that want the output to replace > an input file. That is why I added the >; redirection operator to ksh93. > > With >; you can do > sed -e s/foo/bar/ file >; file > to do in place sed. The >; operator generates the output in a temporary file > and moves the file to the original file only if the command terminates > with 0 exit status. I agree that engineering a single fix into the shell that can apply to multiple situations, rather than chasing down a set of applications to add an in-place editing option to each, is a much more flexible and powerful approach. Can we get buy-in from other shell developers to support '>;' as an atomic temp-file replacement-on-success idiom, if POSIX were to standardize the existing practice of ksh93 as the basis? I assume on the ksh implementation that the temp file is discarded if the command (simple or compound) feeding the redirection failed? If the redirection is used on a simple command, is there any shorthand for specifying that the destination name on success also be fed as an argument to the command, to avoid the redundancy of having to type 'file' both before and after the '>;' operator? I assume that this is like any other redirection operator, where an optional fd number can be prepended, as in '2>; file' to collect stderr and overwrite file on success? What happens if there is more than one '>;' redirection in the same command, and both target the same end file (whether or not by the same file name)? What happens if the command succeeds, but the rename of the temp file to the destination fails? Are there clobber ('>|') or append ('>>') variants? -- Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org