bug#7842: acknowledged by developer (control message for bug 7842)

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, 7842@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 17:50:34 -0800
> 
> But just in case you *really* don't understand what I'm talking about,
> let me try a simple example that might help you understand.  Are these
> two commands equivalent?:
> 
> $ ps > tempfile; grep bash tempfile; rm tempfile
> $ ps | grep bash
> 
> No, obviously they're not:
> 
> * The first touches the disk, the second does not.
> 
> * The first requires me to pick a temporary file name that does not
>   collide with an existing file on disk, the second does not.
> 
> * The first requires me to cleanup a temporary file, the second does
>   not.

Emacs already does all that in a number of commands, such as
call-process-region.  How is this situation different?

> This is first year programmer stuff.

That was a nasty thing to say.  It is uncalled for, because none of
the responses so far was either ad-hominem or disrespectful.

> I think what's really going on here is that you're trying to dismiss
> this request because it's hard to implement and you for some reason feel
> you need to close out wishlist reports (why?).  I guess I'm willing to
> accept that.  But please don't keep feeding me bullshit.  It's childish.
> Just be an adult and explain what the issue is without trying to blow
> smoke up my ass.

Please drop the attitude and the profanities, or you won't hear from
me anymore.

The real reason is explained in the ELisp manual:

     It is impossible to separate the standard output and standard error
  streams of the subprocess, because Emacs normally spawns the subprocess
  inside a pseudo-TTY, and a pseudo-TTY has only one output channel.  If
  you want to keep the output to those streams separate, you should
  redirect one of them to a file--for example, by using an appropriate
  shell command.