Catalin Marinas wrote:
Unfortunately, if the '---' line is missing, it consumes all the input
lines. Is this the case with your patch?
Nope. It consumes the correct ammount of lines. The problem is that I
have to give it a kick (^D) to start things twice. The first for
__parse_patch() and the second for _input(). I put some debug-prints in
there and the for-loops will not start executing on the first complete
line, only EOF.
quoted
If you would cache the input to a file (or memory) you would remove both
of these problems.
True, but it requires more work than simply writing the patch to a
file and reading it twice.
If it supports everything when given a filename then shouldn't adding a
preprocessing step to dump stdin to disk give the same code path?
Rgds
Pierre