Problems with 'call
[1/5] from: tim-johnsons::web::com at: 19-Apr-2006 17:19
I'm picking up this topic again:
there are features to 'call on linux that are downright baffling, and if
I were to use it in an application, rather strange to me.
Let's look at some examples:
>> res: call "ls *.r"
user.r ;; okay
== 0 ;; exit code of 0 is correct
;; now let's introduce a legitimate call that has unsuccessful results
res: call "ls *.cpp"
ls: *.cpp: No such file or directory
== 0 ;; hmmm! now let's do the same from the shell.
[tim-linus tim]$ ls *.cpp
ls: *.cpp: No such file or directory
[tim-linus tim]$ echo $?
1
;; NOTE the differences in the exit code.
Now let's 'buffer' the output
>> buffer: copy ""
== ""
res: call/output "ls *.r" buffer
== 214 ;; say what?
>> buffer
== "user.r^/" ;; good
;; now the following is definitely unsettling, because it disables the
;; programmer's ability to gracefully handle errors:
>> clear buffer
== ""
>> res: call/output "ls *.cpp" buffer
;; Hoy moly, prints to stdout
ls: *.cpp: No such file or directory
== 214 ;; again exit code is inconsistant with shell command
>> buffer
== "" ;; and nothing in the buffer
;; Trying another refinement
res: call/error "ls *.cpp" buffer
== 214
>> buffer
== "ls: *.cpp: No such file or directory^/"
;; now that's a bit better, at least we've captured the error message.
;; but I'm still baffled about the anomalies in the exit codes.
;; BTW: using the /info refinement returns the same exit code as
;; an attribute
Just curious. Does anyone think that this should be treated as a bug?
Otherwise, I could wrap this in a function that could handle some of
these inconsistancies.
tim
--
Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com
[2/5] from: greggirwin::mindspring::com at: 20-Apr-2006 9:54
Hi Tim,
It sounds buggy to me, but maybe a real Linux user will jump in and
say for sure (if they can dupe it and think you should RAMBO it).
-- Gregg
[3/5] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 20-Apr-2006 8:49
* Gregg Irwin <greggirwin-mindspring.com> [060420 08:25]:
> Hi Tim,
>
> It sounds buggy to me,
Yup.
> but maybe a real Linux user will jump in and
> say for sure (if they can dupe it and think you should RAMBO it).
I've seen a posting from 1 linux user who showed different results,
but didn't show the testing that I did...
tim
--
Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com
[4/5] from: tomc:cs:uoregon at: 20-Apr-2006 14:59
Hi Tim,
I duplicated your examples on RH Linux & solaris
I think it should be ramboed
Tim Johnson wrote:
> I'm picking up this topic again:
> there are features to 'call on linux that are downright baffling, and if
<<quoted lines omitted: 42>>
> these inconsistancies.
> tim
--
... nice weather eh tomc-cs.uoregon.edu
[5/5] from: tim-johnsons::web::com at: 20-Apr-2006 15:16
* Tom Conlin <tomc-cs.uoregon.edu> [060420 14:09]:
> Hi Tim,
> I duplicated your examples on RH Linux & solaris
> I think it should be ramboed
Ramboed it is....
tj
> Tim Johnson wrote:
> > I'm picking up this topic again:
<<quoted lines omitted: 55>>
> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
> lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
--
Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted