added example of piping commands together with run

[inthecloud247]

No description provided.

[rianwouters]

+1

[RomanSaveljev]

I had to tackle the same issue and I have resorted to the following:

run wc -l <(foo)

In my opinion, this way you have less problems with quoting

[rianwouters]

In this particular case yes. But in general good to document how to run with pipes.

Verstuurd door Outlook voor Android

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 2:35 AM -0700, "Roman Savelyev" notifications@github.com wrote:
I had to tackle the same issue and I have resorted to the following:

run wc -l <(foo)

In my opinion, this way you have less problems with quoting

---

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#47 (comment)

[jch]

Thanks for opening this PR. It was helpful

[rianwouters]

you're welcome :-)
also see https://github.com/rianwouters/bexpect :-)

groetjes,

Rian

Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 21:05:05 -0800
From: notifications@github.com
To: bats@noreply.github.com
CC: rianwouters@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [bats] added example of piping commands together with run (#47)

Thanks for opening this PR. It was helpful

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[jch]

After reading through the original issue (#10 (comment)), I decided to avoid using run altogether. It just sets the special variables $output and $status, both of which are easily available. Here's an example: https://github.com/jch/jsg/blob/a960847b03c9de392f30b112d2c7ab2591608a6e/test/bin/jsg_markdown_test.sh#L4-L5

[AlexSkrypnyk]

As others pointed out, using bash -c is better (covers more cases) than using output redirect.

This approach was tested and it works.

Can we please merge this as using pipes in scripting (especially with grep) is a common approach, therefore this will be useful to many people (I myself just spent 2 hours debugging why run does not support pipes).