-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 811
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Don't buffer command output when running on a single thread? #522
Comments
Thank you very much for your feedback. That sounds like a reasonable request to me. Not sure how difficult this would be to implement. |
Is this issue still open? If so I could take a stab at it |
I guess so :) |
Wonderful, could you be a bit more specific on the behavior you're suggesting so I can get a better handle on where to start? |
Okay, I think I can give you an example. Imagine you have a folder with a bunch of audio files (mp3, aac, opus, flac). Now let's say you want to list only the You'd do something like this:
The But here's the problem: Since Using
Since the output isn't going to be buffered in this case, you could, for example, press |
Also, any long-running command that shows intermediate output that you would like to see. For example: search for some files and copy all of them somewhere with |
Closing, as this has been implemented by #620 Thanks a lot for everyone's work! :) |
Hey there.
I'm not sure if this is possible with
fd
already (sorry if it is), but wouldn't it make sense to not buffer command output, by default, when using-j 1 / --threads 1
? For example:$ fd --type directory --max-depth 1 --threads 1 --exec bash -c "date && sleep 3"
Currently,
fd
will buffer the output ofbash
and only display it after the process exits. But in this particular case, sincebash
will always run consecutively and not in parallel, I think it would make sense to not buffer them.What do you think?
Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: