Why won't my program accept the piped output of another program properly?











up vote
0
down vote

favorite












I have a C program compiled with 3 .c files. Essentially, that program prints out squares to the standard output based on x and y size input which I have defined in the main. The relevant code is below:



void    rush(int x, int y);

int main(void)
{
rush(3, 3);
return (0);
}


running the executable of the main like so:



./a.out


gives the following:



o-o
| |
o-o


and changing the parameters passed to the rush function to (5, 5) yields the following:



o---o
| |
| |
| |
o---o


You get the idea. Each line is delimited by a n which allows the function to print the proper next line. I have another test program which is a simple compiled main that simply prints the the value of ARGC as I wanted to test the behavior of what piping such an input would give. The second main program is like so:



#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
printf("argc value is: %dn", argc);
return (0);
}


Running the following commands:



./a.out | ./test


I get the following output:



argc value is: 1


Which didn't make sense to me initially, but then I remembered it was because some commands require xargs to accept input properly from stdin. Using xargs with (5, 5) as input in the main:



./a.out | xargs ./test


resulted in:



argc value is: 9


Thus I have two questions. Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves? And knowing the input to the test file, why is argc == 9? How does the program separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?










share|improve this question


















  • 3




    the pipe pipes one commands stdout to another commands stdin, which is not the same as arguments passed to it.
    – tkausl
    Nov 11 at 1:27












  • Try ./test $(./a.out). (Maybe rename the filetest.c, because test is already an existing program)
    – Walter A
    Nov 11 at 9:50















up vote
0
down vote

favorite












I have a C program compiled with 3 .c files. Essentially, that program prints out squares to the standard output based on x and y size input which I have defined in the main. The relevant code is below:



void    rush(int x, int y);

int main(void)
{
rush(3, 3);
return (0);
}


running the executable of the main like so:



./a.out


gives the following:



o-o
| |
o-o


and changing the parameters passed to the rush function to (5, 5) yields the following:



o---o
| |
| |
| |
o---o


You get the idea. Each line is delimited by a n which allows the function to print the proper next line. I have another test program which is a simple compiled main that simply prints the the value of ARGC as I wanted to test the behavior of what piping such an input would give. The second main program is like so:



#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
printf("argc value is: %dn", argc);
return (0);
}


Running the following commands:



./a.out | ./test


I get the following output:



argc value is: 1


Which didn't make sense to me initially, but then I remembered it was because some commands require xargs to accept input properly from stdin. Using xargs with (5, 5) as input in the main:



./a.out | xargs ./test


resulted in:



argc value is: 9


Thus I have two questions. Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves? And knowing the input to the test file, why is argc == 9? How does the program separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?










share|improve this question


















  • 3




    the pipe pipes one commands stdout to another commands stdin, which is not the same as arguments passed to it.
    – tkausl
    Nov 11 at 1:27












  • Try ./test $(./a.out). (Maybe rename the filetest.c, because test is already an existing program)
    – Walter A
    Nov 11 at 9:50













up vote
0
down vote

favorite









up vote
0
down vote

favorite











I have a C program compiled with 3 .c files. Essentially, that program prints out squares to the standard output based on x and y size input which I have defined in the main. The relevant code is below:



void    rush(int x, int y);

int main(void)
{
rush(3, 3);
return (0);
}


running the executable of the main like so:



./a.out


gives the following:



o-o
| |
o-o


and changing the parameters passed to the rush function to (5, 5) yields the following:



o---o
| |
| |
| |
o---o


You get the idea. Each line is delimited by a n which allows the function to print the proper next line. I have another test program which is a simple compiled main that simply prints the the value of ARGC as I wanted to test the behavior of what piping such an input would give. The second main program is like so:



#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
printf("argc value is: %dn", argc);
return (0);
}


Running the following commands:



./a.out | ./test


I get the following output:



argc value is: 1


Which didn't make sense to me initially, but then I remembered it was because some commands require xargs to accept input properly from stdin. Using xargs with (5, 5) as input in the main:



./a.out | xargs ./test


resulted in:



argc value is: 9


Thus I have two questions. Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves? And knowing the input to the test file, why is argc == 9? How does the program separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?










share|improve this question













I have a C program compiled with 3 .c files. Essentially, that program prints out squares to the standard output based on x and y size input which I have defined in the main. The relevant code is below:



void    rush(int x, int y);

int main(void)
{
rush(3, 3);
return (0);
}


running the executable of the main like so:



./a.out


gives the following:



o-o
| |
o-o


and changing the parameters passed to the rush function to (5, 5) yields the following:



o---o
| |
| |
| |
o---o


You get the idea. Each line is delimited by a n which allows the function to print the proper next line. I have another test program which is a simple compiled main that simply prints the the value of ARGC as I wanted to test the behavior of what piping such an input would give. The second main program is like so:



#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
printf("argc value is: %dn", argc);
return (0);
}


Running the following commands:



./a.out | ./test


I get the following output:



argc value is: 1


Which didn't make sense to me initially, but then I remembered it was because some commands require xargs to accept input properly from stdin. Using xargs with (5, 5) as input in the main:



./a.out | xargs ./test


resulted in:



argc value is: 9


Thus I have two questions. Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves? And knowing the input to the test file, why is argc == 9? How does the program separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?







c unix command-line pipe argc






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Nov 11 at 1:22









Thunderpurtz

275




275








  • 3




    the pipe pipes one commands stdout to another commands stdin, which is not the same as arguments passed to it.
    – tkausl
    Nov 11 at 1:27












  • Try ./test $(./a.out). (Maybe rename the filetest.c, because test is already an existing program)
    – Walter A
    Nov 11 at 9:50














  • 3




    the pipe pipes one commands stdout to another commands stdin, which is not the same as arguments passed to it.
    – tkausl
    Nov 11 at 1:27












  • Try ./test $(./a.out). (Maybe rename the filetest.c, because test is already an existing program)
    – Walter A
    Nov 11 at 9:50








3




3




the pipe pipes one commands stdout to another commands stdin, which is not the same as arguments passed to it.
– tkausl
Nov 11 at 1:27






the pipe pipes one commands stdout to another commands stdin, which is not the same as arguments passed to it.
– tkausl
Nov 11 at 1:27














Try ./test $(./a.out). (Maybe rename the filetest.c, because test is already an existing program)
– Walter A
Nov 11 at 9:50




Try ./test $(./a.out). (Maybe rename the filetest.c, because test is already an existing program)
– Walter A
Nov 11 at 9:50












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










This will be long, so grab your favourite drink. Don't just skip to the answers after the break.



First, examine the command-line arguments supplied to a program, say args.c:



#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv)
{
int i;
printf("argc = %dn", argc);
for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
printf("argv[%d] = "%s"n", i, argv[i]);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}


Compile that using your favourite C compiler; I use gcc:



gcc -Wall -O2 args.c -o args


If you run say



./args one two


it will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "one"
argv[2] = "two"


All Unixes have a command line utility or shell built-in printf that works much like the C printf() standard library function does. We can run for example



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen'


and we'll see



Hello, world!
Second line
Third line


Now, if we connect the two with a pipe,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | ./args


we get



argc = 1
argv[0] = "./args"


because there were no parameters to ./args, and the above args.c ignores standard input completely.



The xargs utility command reads the input to it, and then executes its own command-line arguments as a command, adding the input it reads as additional parameters. It is highly configurable, too. If you run



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs ./args


you'll get



argc = 7
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello,"
argv[2] = "world!"
argv[3] = "Second"
argv[4] = "line"
argv[5] = "Third"
argv[6] = "line"


because xargs turns each token in the input, separated by whitespace, into a command line argument. If we tell xargs to turn each input line to a separate argument, by using the -d SEPARATOR option, with newline as the separator:



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' ./args


we get



argc = 4
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argv[3] = "Third line"


If we tell xargs to add at most two arguments per command executed, by adding the -n 2 option,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' -n 2 ./args


we'll get



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argc = 2
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Third line"


This output means that our ./args got actually executed twice. First was effectively ./args 'Hello, world!' 'Second line', and the second was ./args 'Third line'.



Another important option to xargs is -r, which tells it to not run the command without any additional arguments:



true | xargs -r ./args


does not output anything, because xargs sees no input, and the -r option tells it to not run our args program if there are no additional arguments.



When manipulating file names or paths, the -0 (dash zero) option tells xargs that the input separator is the nul character, , which in C delimits strings. If we use that in the input to xargs, even strings with newlines and such will be correctly split into arguments. For example:



printf 'One thingnon two linesSecond thing' | xargs -0 ./args


will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "One thing
on two lines"
argv[2] = "Second thing"


which is exactly what one would want, if processing file names or paths in a robust manner.






Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves?




Of course: just read standard input. xargs is almost certainly written in C itself on all Unixy systems.




How does [xargs] separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?




The short answer is that it depends on the options used, because xargs is a pretty powerful little tool.



The full answer is, look at the sources. The source for the GNU xargs (part of findutils) is here, and the source for FreeBSD version is here.



The code answer depends on whether you can use POSIX.1 or not, specifically getline() or getdelim(). If you have a single-character separator (be it any single-byte character at all, even nul), you can use getdelim() to reach each "parameter" from the input as a separate string. This is what I'd do, but it is not unix, it is a posix solution. (Nowadays, if you have a maintained Unixy computer, it is almost certain to have POSIX.1 support in its C library built-in.)




Why is argc == 9?




If we duplicate your input using printf 'o---on| |n| |n| |no---on' and pipe it to xargs ./args, the output is as expected,



argc = 9
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "|"
argv[3] = "|"
argv[4] = "|"
argv[5] = "|"
argv[6] = "|"
argv[7] = "|"
argv[8] = "o---o"


i.e. each part of your ascii art separated at whitespace, and supplied as a command-line parameter. If we pipe it to xargs -d 'n' ./args, the output is



argc = 6
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "| |"
argv[3] = "| |"
argv[4] = "| |"
argv[5] = "o---o"


If you had written that initial args.c program for yourself, you probably could have found the answer to your questions yourself via exploration. That is what makes programming so powerful: you can write tools that help you understand the problems you wish to solve. Applying the Unix philosophy and the KISS principle means those tools are often quite simple to write as well. Just write them well in the first place, so you can trust their results, and don't need to rewrite them too often.






share|improve this answer





















  • your explanation was exceedingly thorough and informative. Thanks for taking the time to give me this info! I ended up discovering that I could do so by reading form the STDIN shortly after my initial post which lead me down another stack overflow post. I will also definitely take a look at the man for xargs to a get a better idea of it as it really does seem like a powerful tool. Cheers!
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 9:48


















up vote
0
down vote













This happens because xargs takes the entire input (all lines, not just a single line) and splits it by white-space characters. So the arguments your test code gets are (you can print them yourself to debug):




  1. ./test

  2. o---o

  3. |

  4. |

  5. |

  6. |

  7. |

  8. |

  9. o---o


If you meant to read from stdin rather than parsing arguments use cin >> string_variable.






share|improve this answer





















  • yeah i actually just decided to print out the values stored to test (idk why i didn't think of that earlier) and what you just posted is what I got. i didn't realize it split on white space characters.
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 1:44










  • @Thunderpurtz - see: "word-splitting" in man bash. (also note the parameters are named "$0-8" (e.g. "$0" is "./test", "$1" is "o--o", etc...)
    – David C. Rankin
    Nov 11 at 2:00






  • 2




    The question is tagged C, not C++.
    – aschepler
    Nov 11 at 3:07











Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53245031%2fwhy-wont-my-program-accept-the-piped-output-of-another-program-properly%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
2
down vote



accepted










This will be long, so grab your favourite drink. Don't just skip to the answers after the break.



First, examine the command-line arguments supplied to a program, say args.c:



#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv)
{
int i;
printf("argc = %dn", argc);
for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
printf("argv[%d] = "%s"n", i, argv[i]);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}


Compile that using your favourite C compiler; I use gcc:



gcc -Wall -O2 args.c -o args


If you run say



./args one two


it will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "one"
argv[2] = "two"


All Unixes have a command line utility or shell built-in printf that works much like the C printf() standard library function does. We can run for example



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen'


and we'll see



Hello, world!
Second line
Third line


Now, if we connect the two with a pipe,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | ./args


we get



argc = 1
argv[0] = "./args"


because there were no parameters to ./args, and the above args.c ignores standard input completely.



The xargs utility command reads the input to it, and then executes its own command-line arguments as a command, adding the input it reads as additional parameters. It is highly configurable, too. If you run



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs ./args


you'll get



argc = 7
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello,"
argv[2] = "world!"
argv[3] = "Second"
argv[4] = "line"
argv[5] = "Third"
argv[6] = "line"


because xargs turns each token in the input, separated by whitespace, into a command line argument. If we tell xargs to turn each input line to a separate argument, by using the -d SEPARATOR option, with newline as the separator:



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' ./args


we get



argc = 4
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argv[3] = "Third line"


If we tell xargs to add at most two arguments per command executed, by adding the -n 2 option,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' -n 2 ./args


we'll get



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argc = 2
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Third line"


This output means that our ./args got actually executed twice. First was effectively ./args 'Hello, world!' 'Second line', and the second was ./args 'Third line'.



Another important option to xargs is -r, which tells it to not run the command without any additional arguments:



true | xargs -r ./args


does not output anything, because xargs sees no input, and the -r option tells it to not run our args program if there are no additional arguments.



When manipulating file names or paths, the -0 (dash zero) option tells xargs that the input separator is the nul character, , which in C delimits strings. If we use that in the input to xargs, even strings with newlines and such will be correctly split into arguments. For example:



printf 'One thingnon two linesSecond thing' | xargs -0 ./args


will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "One thing
on two lines"
argv[2] = "Second thing"


which is exactly what one would want, if processing file names or paths in a robust manner.






Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves?




Of course: just read standard input. xargs is almost certainly written in C itself on all Unixy systems.




How does [xargs] separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?




The short answer is that it depends on the options used, because xargs is a pretty powerful little tool.



The full answer is, look at the sources. The source for the GNU xargs (part of findutils) is here, and the source for FreeBSD version is here.



The code answer depends on whether you can use POSIX.1 or not, specifically getline() or getdelim(). If you have a single-character separator (be it any single-byte character at all, even nul), you can use getdelim() to reach each "parameter" from the input as a separate string. This is what I'd do, but it is not unix, it is a posix solution. (Nowadays, if you have a maintained Unixy computer, it is almost certain to have POSIX.1 support in its C library built-in.)




Why is argc == 9?




If we duplicate your input using printf 'o---on| |n| |n| |no---on' and pipe it to xargs ./args, the output is as expected,



argc = 9
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "|"
argv[3] = "|"
argv[4] = "|"
argv[5] = "|"
argv[6] = "|"
argv[7] = "|"
argv[8] = "o---o"


i.e. each part of your ascii art separated at whitespace, and supplied as a command-line parameter. If we pipe it to xargs -d 'n' ./args, the output is



argc = 6
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "| |"
argv[3] = "| |"
argv[4] = "| |"
argv[5] = "o---o"


If you had written that initial args.c program for yourself, you probably could have found the answer to your questions yourself via exploration. That is what makes programming so powerful: you can write tools that help you understand the problems you wish to solve. Applying the Unix philosophy and the KISS principle means those tools are often quite simple to write as well. Just write them well in the first place, so you can trust their results, and don't need to rewrite them too often.






share|improve this answer





















  • your explanation was exceedingly thorough and informative. Thanks for taking the time to give me this info! I ended up discovering that I could do so by reading form the STDIN shortly after my initial post which lead me down another stack overflow post. I will also definitely take a look at the man for xargs to a get a better idea of it as it really does seem like a powerful tool. Cheers!
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 9:48















up vote
2
down vote



accepted










This will be long, so grab your favourite drink. Don't just skip to the answers after the break.



First, examine the command-line arguments supplied to a program, say args.c:



#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv)
{
int i;
printf("argc = %dn", argc);
for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
printf("argv[%d] = "%s"n", i, argv[i]);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}


Compile that using your favourite C compiler; I use gcc:



gcc -Wall -O2 args.c -o args


If you run say



./args one two


it will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "one"
argv[2] = "two"


All Unixes have a command line utility or shell built-in printf that works much like the C printf() standard library function does. We can run for example



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen'


and we'll see



Hello, world!
Second line
Third line


Now, if we connect the two with a pipe,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | ./args


we get



argc = 1
argv[0] = "./args"


because there were no parameters to ./args, and the above args.c ignores standard input completely.



The xargs utility command reads the input to it, and then executes its own command-line arguments as a command, adding the input it reads as additional parameters. It is highly configurable, too. If you run



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs ./args


you'll get



argc = 7
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello,"
argv[2] = "world!"
argv[3] = "Second"
argv[4] = "line"
argv[5] = "Third"
argv[6] = "line"


because xargs turns each token in the input, separated by whitespace, into a command line argument. If we tell xargs to turn each input line to a separate argument, by using the -d SEPARATOR option, with newline as the separator:



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' ./args


we get



argc = 4
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argv[3] = "Third line"


If we tell xargs to add at most two arguments per command executed, by adding the -n 2 option,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' -n 2 ./args


we'll get



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argc = 2
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Third line"


This output means that our ./args got actually executed twice. First was effectively ./args 'Hello, world!' 'Second line', and the second was ./args 'Third line'.



Another important option to xargs is -r, which tells it to not run the command without any additional arguments:



true | xargs -r ./args


does not output anything, because xargs sees no input, and the -r option tells it to not run our args program if there are no additional arguments.



When manipulating file names or paths, the -0 (dash zero) option tells xargs that the input separator is the nul character, , which in C delimits strings. If we use that in the input to xargs, even strings with newlines and such will be correctly split into arguments. For example:



printf 'One thingnon two linesSecond thing' | xargs -0 ./args


will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "One thing
on two lines"
argv[2] = "Second thing"


which is exactly what one would want, if processing file names or paths in a robust manner.






Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves?




Of course: just read standard input. xargs is almost certainly written in C itself on all Unixy systems.




How does [xargs] separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?




The short answer is that it depends on the options used, because xargs is a pretty powerful little tool.



The full answer is, look at the sources. The source for the GNU xargs (part of findutils) is here, and the source for FreeBSD version is here.



The code answer depends on whether you can use POSIX.1 or not, specifically getline() or getdelim(). If you have a single-character separator (be it any single-byte character at all, even nul), you can use getdelim() to reach each "parameter" from the input as a separate string. This is what I'd do, but it is not unix, it is a posix solution. (Nowadays, if you have a maintained Unixy computer, it is almost certain to have POSIX.1 support in its C library built-in.)




Why is argc == 9?




If we duplicate your input using printf 'o---on| |n| |n| |no---on' and pipe it to xargs ./args, the output is as expected,



argc = 9
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "|"
argv[3] = "|"
argv[4] = "|"
argv[5] = "|"
argv[6] = "|"
argv[7] = "|"
argv[8] = "o---o"


i.e. each part of your ascii art separated at whitespace, and supplied as a command-line parameter. If we pipe it to xargs -d 'n' ./args, the output is



argc = 6
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "| |"
argv[3] = "| |"
argv[4] = "| |"
argv[5] = "o---o"


If you had written that initial args.c program for yourself, you probably could have found the answer to your questions yourself via exploration. That is what makes programming so powerful: you can write tools that help you understand the problems you wish to solve. Applying the Unix philosophy and the KISS principle means those tools are often quite simple to write as well. Just write them well in the first place, so you can trust their results, and don't need to rewrite them too often.






share|improve this answer





















  • your explanation was exceedingly thorough and informative. Thanks for taking the time to give me this info! I ended up discovering that I could do so by reading form the STDIN shortly after my initial post which lead me down another stack overflow post. I will also definitely take a look at the man for xargs to a get a better idea of it as it really does seem like a powerful tool. Cheers!
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 9:48













up vote
2
down vote



accepted







up vote
2
down vote



accepted






This will be long, so grab your favourite drink. Don't just skip to the answers after the break.



First, examine the command-line arguments supplied to a program, say args.c:



#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv)
{
int i;
printf("argc = %dn", argc);
for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
printf("argv[%d] = "%s"n", i, argv[i]);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}


Compile that using your favourite C compiler; I use gcc:



gcc -Wall -O2 args.c -o args


If you run say



./args one two


it will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "one"
argv[2] = "two"


All Unixes have a command line utility or shell built-in printf that works much like the C printf() standard library function does. We can run for example



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen'


and we'll see



Hello, world!
Second line
Third line


Now, if we connect the two with a pipe,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | ./args


we get



argc = 1
argv[0] = "./args"


because there were no parameters to ./args, and the above args.c ignores standard input completely.



The xargs utility command reads the input to it, and then executes its own command-line arguments as a command, adding the input it reads as additional parameters. It is highly configurable, too. If you run



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs ./args


you'll get



argc = 7
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello,"
argv[2] = "world!"
argv[3] = "Second"
argv[4] = "line"
argv[5] = "Third"
argv[6] = "line"


because xargs turns each token in the input, separated by whitespace, into a command line argument. If we tell xargs to turn each input line to a separate argument, by using the -d SEPARATOR option, with newline as the separator:



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' ./args


we get



argc = 4
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argv[3] = "Third line"


If we tell xargs to add at most two arguments per command executed, by adding the -n 2 option,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' -n 2 ./args


we'll get



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argc = 2
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Third line"


This output means that our ./args got actually executed twice. First was effectively ./args 'Hello, world!' 'Second line', and the second was ./args 'Third line'.



Another important option to xargs is -r, which tells it to not run the command without any additional arguments:



true | xargs -r ./args


does not output anything, because xargs sees no input, and the -r option tells it to not run our args program if there are no additional arguments.



When manipulating file names or paths, the -0 (dash zero) option tells xargs that the input separator is the nul character, , which in C delimits strings. If we use that in the input to xargs, even strings with newlines and such will be correctly split into arguments. For example:



printf 'One thingnon two linesSecond thing' | xargs -0 ./args


will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "One thing
on two lines"
argv[2] = "Second thing"


which is exactly what one would want, if processing file names or paths in a robust manner.






Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves?




Of course: just read standard input. xargs is almost certainly written in C itself on all Unixy systems.




How does [xargs] separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?




The short answer is that it depends on the options used, because xargs is a pretty powerful little tool.



The full answer is, look at the sources. The source for the GNU xargs (part of findutils) is here, and the source for FreeBSD version is here.



The code answer depends on whether you can use POSIX.1 or not, specifically getline() or getdelim(). If you have a single-character separator (be it any single-byte character at all, even nul), you can use getdelim() to reach each "parameter" from the input as a separate string. This is what I'd do, but it is not unix, it is a posix solution. (Nowadays, if you have a maintained Unixy computer, it is almost certain to have POSIX.1 support in its C library built-in.)




Why is argc == 9?




If we duplicate your input using printf 'o---on| |n| |n| |no---on' and pipe it to xargs ./args, the output is as expected,



argc = 9
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "|"
argv[3] = "|"
argv[4] = "|"
argv[5] = "|"
argv[6] = "|"
argv[7] = "|"
argv[8] = "o---o"


i.e. each part of your ascii art separated at whitespace, and supplied as a command-line parameter. If we pipe it to xargs -d 'n' ./args, the output is



argc = 6
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "| |"
argv[3] = "| |"
argv[4] = "| |"
argv[5] = "o---o"


If you had written that initial args.c program for yourself, you probably could have found the answer to your questions yourself via exploration. That is what makes programming so powerful: you can write tools that help you understand the problems you wish to solve. Applying the Unix philosophy and the KISS principle means those tools are often quite simple to write as well. Just write them well in the first place, so you can trust their results, and don't need to rewrite them too often.






share|improve this answer












This will be long, so grab your favourite drink. Don't just skip to the answers after the break.



First, examine the command-line arguments supplied to a program, say args.c:



#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv)
{
int i;
printf("argc = %dn", argc);
for (i = 0; i < argc; i++)
printf("argv[%d] = "%s"n", i, argv[i]);
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}


Compile that using your favourite C compiler; I use gcc:



gcc -Wall -O2 args.c -o args


If you run say



./args one two


it will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "one"
argv[2] = "two"


All Unixes have a command line utility or shell built-in printf that works much like the C printf() standard library function does. We can run for example



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen'


and we'll see



Hello, world!
Second line
Third line


Now, if we connect the two with a pipe,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | ./args


we get



argc = 1
argv[0] = "./args"


because there were no parameters to ./args, and the above args.c ignores standard input completely.



The xargs utility command reads the input to it, and then executes its own command-line arguments as a command, adding the input it reads as additional parameters. It is highly configurable, too. If you run



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs ./args


you'll get



argc = 7
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello,"
argv[2] = "world!"
argv[3] = "Second"
argv[4] = "line"
argv[5] = "Third"
argv[6] = "line"


because xargs turns each token in the input, separated by whitespace, into a command line argument. If we tell xargs to turn each input line to a separate argument, by using the -d SEPARATOR option, with newline as the separator:



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' ./args


we get



argc = 4
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argv[3] = "Third line"


If we tell xargs to add at most two arguments per command executed, by adding the -n 2 option,



printf 'Hello, world!nSecond linenThird linen' | xargs -d 'n' -n 2 ./args


we'll get



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Hello, world!"
argv[2] = "Second line"
argc = 2
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "Third line"


This output means that our ./args got actually executed twice. First was effectively ./args 'Hello, world!' 'Second line', and the second was ./args 'Third line'.



Another important option to xargs is -r, which tells it to not run the command without any additional arguments:



true | xargs -r ./args


does not output anything, because xargs sees no input, and the -r option tells it to not run our args program if there are no additional arguments.



When manipulating file names or paths, the -0 (dash zero) option tells xargs that the input separator is the nul character, , which in C delimits strings. If we use that in the input to xargs, even strings with newlines and such will be correctly split into arguments. For example:



printf 'One thingnon two linesSecond thing' | xargs -0 ./args


will output



argc = 3
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "One thing
on two lines"
argv[2] = "Second thing"


which is exactly what one would want, if processing file names or paths in a robust manner.






Is there a way to do this without needing xargs and can be done in the c files themselves?




Of course: just read standard input. xargs is almost certainly written in C itself on all Unixy systems.




How does [xargs] separate out a string in that format and decide what to put in the array?




The short answer is that it depends on the options used, because xargs is a pretty powerful little tool.



The full answer is, look at the sources. The source for the GNU xargs (part of findutils) is here, and the source for FreeBSD version is here.



The code answer depends on whether you can use POSIX.1 or not, specifically getline() or getdelim(). If you have a single-character separator (be it any single-byte character at all, even nul), you can use getdelim() to reach each "parameter" from the input as a separate string. This is what I'd do, but it is not unix, it is a posix solution. (Nowadays, if you have a maintained Unixy computer, it is almost certain to have POSIX.1 support in its C library built-in.)




Why is argc == 9?




If we duplicate your input using printf 'o---on| |n| |n| |no---on' and pipe it to xargs ./args, the output is as expected,



argc = 9
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "|"
argv[3] = "|"
argv[4] = "|"
argv[5] = "|"
argv[6] = "|"
argv[7] = "|"
argv[8] = "o---o"


i.e. each part of your ascii art separated at whitespace, and supplied as a command-line parameter. If we pipe it to xargs -d 'n' ./args, the output is



argc = 6
argv[0] = "./args"
argv[1] = "o---o"
argv[2] = "| |"
argv[3] = "| |"
argv[4] = "| |"
argv[5] = "o---o"


If you had written that initial args.c program for yourself, you probably could have found the answer to your questions yourself via exploration. That is what makes programming so powerful: you can write tools that help you understand the problems you wish to solve. Applying the Unix philosophy and the KISS principle means those tools are often quite simple to write as well. Just write them well in the first place, so you can trust their results, and don't need to rewrite them too often.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 11 at 4:49









Nominal Animal

28k33259




28k33259












  • your explanation was exceedingly thorough and informative. Thanks for taking the time to give me this info! I ended up discovering that I could do so by reading form the STDIN shortly after my initial post which lead me down another stack overflow post. I will also definitely take a look at the man for xargs to a get a better idea of it as it really does seem like a powerful tool. Cheers!
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 9:48


















  • your explanation was exceedingly thorough and informative. Thanks for taking the time to give me this info! I ended up discovering that I could do so by reading form the STDIN shortly after my initial post which lead me down another stack overflow post. I will also definitely take a look at the man for xargs to a get a better idea of it as it really does seem like a powerful tool. Cheers!
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 9:48
















your explanation was exceedingly thorough and informative. Thanks for taking the time to give me this info! I ended up discovering that I could do so by reading form the STDIN shortly after my initial post which lead me down another stack overflow post. I will also definitely take a look at the man for xargs to a get a better idea of it as it really does seem like a powerful tool. Cheers!
– Thunderpurtz
Nov 11 at 9:48




your explanation was exceedingly thorough and informative. Thanks for taking the time to give me this info! I ended up discovering that I could do so by reading form the STDIN shortly after my initial post which lead me down another stack overflow post. I will also definitely take a look at the man for xargs to a get a better idea of it as it really does seem like a powerful tool. Cheers!
– Thunderpurtz
Nov 11 at 9:48












up vote
0
down vote













This happens because xargs takes the entire input (all lines, not just a single line) and splits it by white-space characters. So the arguments your test code gets are (you can print them yourself to debug):




  1. ./test

  2. o---o

  3. |

  4. |

  5. |

  6. |

  7. |

  8. |

  9. o---o


If you meant to read from stdin rather than parsing arguments use cin >> string_variable.






share|improve this answer





















  • yeah i actually just decided to print out the values stored to test (idk why i didn't think of that earlier) and what you just posted is what I got. i didn't realize it split on white space characters.
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 1:44










  • @Thunderpurtz - see: "word-splitting" in man bash. (also note the parameters are named "$0-8" (e.g. "$0" is "./test", "$1" is "o--o", etc...)
    – David C. Rankin
    Nov 11 at 2:00






  • 2




    The question is tagged C, not C++.
    – aschepler
    Nov 11 at 3:07















up vote
0
down vote













This happens because xargs takes the entire input (all lines, not just a single line) and splits it by white-space characters. So the arguments your test code gets are (you can print them yourself to debug):




  1. ./test

  2. o---o

  3. |

  4. |

  5. |

  6. |

  7. |

  8. |

  9. o---o


If you meant to read from stdin rather than parsing arguments use cin >> string_variable.






share|improve this answer





















  • yeah i actually just decided to print out the values stored to test (idk why i didn't think of that earlier) and what you just posted is what I got. i didn't realize it split on white space characters.
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 1:44










  • @Thunderpurtz - see: "word-splitting" in man bash. (also note the parameters are named "$0-8" (e.g. "$0" is "./test", "$1" is "o--o", etc...)
    – David C. Rankin
    Nov 11 at 2:00






  • 2




    The question is tagged C, not C++.
    – aschepler
    Nov 11 at 3:07













up vote
0
down vote










up vote
0
down vote









This happens because xargs takes the entire input (all lines, not just a single line) and splits it by white-space characters. So the arguments your test code gets are (you can print them yourself to debug):




  1. ./test

  2. o---o

  3. |

  4. |

  5. |

  6. |

  7. |

  8. |

  9. o---o


If you meant to read from stdin rather than parsing arguments use cin >> string_variable.






share|improve this answer












This happens because xargs takes the entire input (all lines, not just a single line) and splits it by white-space characters. So the arguments your test code gets are (you can print them yourself to debug):




  1. ./test

  2. o---o

  3. |

  4. |

  5. |

  6. |

  7. |

  8. |

  9. o---o


If you meant to read from stdin rather than parsing arguments use cin >> string_variable.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Nov 11 at 1:35









Henning Koehler

1,106610




1,106610












  • yeah i actually just decided to print out the values stored to test (idk why i didn't think of that earlier) and what you just posted is what I got. i didn't realize it split on white space characters.
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 1:44










  • @Thunderpurtz - see: "word-splitting" in man bash. (also note the parameters are named "$0-8" (e.g. "$0" is "./test", "$1" is "o--o", etc...)
    – David C. Rankin
    Nov 11 at 2:00






  • 2




    The question is tagged C, not C++.
    – aschepler
    Nov 11 at 3:07


















  • yeah i actually just decided to print out the values stored to test (idk why i didn't think of that earlier) and what you just posted is what I got. i didn't realize it split on white space characters.
    – Thunderpurtz
    Nov 11 at 1:44










  • @Thunderpurtz - see: "word-splitting" in man bash. (also note the parameters are named "$0-8" (e.g. "$0" is "./test", "$1" is "o--o", etc...)
    – David C. Rankin
    Nov 11 at 2:00






  • 2




    The question is tagged C, not C++.
    – aschepler
    Nov 11 at 3:07
















yeah i actually just decided to print out the values stored to test (idk why i didn't think of that earlier) and what you just posted is what I got. i didn't realize it split on white space characters.
– Thunderpurtz
Nov 11 at 1:44




yeah i actually just decided to print out the values stored to test (idk why i didn't think of that earlier) and what you just posted is what I got. i didn't realize it split on white space characters.
– Thunderpurtz
Nov 11 at 1:44












@Thunderpurtz - see: "word-splitting" in man bash. (also note the parameters are named "$0-8" (e.g. "$0" is "./test", "$1" is "o--o", etc...)
– David C. Rankin
Nov 11 at 2:00




@Thunderpurtz - see: "word-splitting" in man bash. (also note the parameters are named "$0-8" (e.g. "$0" is "./test", "$1" is "o--o", etc...)
– David C. Rankin
Nov 11 at 2:00




2




2




The question is tagged C, not C++.
– aschepler
Nov 11 at 3:07




The question is tagged C, not C++.
– aschepler
Nov 11 at 3:07


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53245031%2fwhy-wont-my-program-accept-the-piped-output-of-another-program-properly%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Florida Star v. B. J. F.

Danny Elfman

Retrieve a Users Dashboard in Tumblr with R and TumblR. Oauth Issues