Re: Redirecting the output of a commend in "shell" into a buffer

[C K Kashyap]

Robert - I love emacs more ... I am looking into how to
use comint-output-filter-functions - I have not figured it out yet but it
looks awesome!
Regards,
Kashyap


On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 4:32 AM, Robert Thorpe <rt@robertthorpeconsulting.com
> wrote:

> C K Kashyap <ckkashyap@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> > While using shell, is it possible to redirect output of commands into a
> > buffer?
> > Ofcourse, the shell buffer itself is editable and all but it would be
> nice
> > if I could directly pipe the output of a command into a new buffer.
>
> Emanuel gave one solution, here's another.
>
> There's a hook called "comint-filter-functions" and a command called
> "comint-send-input".  Together these control what gets sent to the
> external process in things like shell buffers.
>
> You could modify these or advice them.  Or you could rebind RET.  For
> example, suppose you create a new "pseudo-command" called "buf".  You
> write: "buf ls RET" in the shell buffer.  Your function finds the "buf"
> at the beginning of the command string.  It then cuts out the rest and
> sends it to shell-command which puts it in a separate buffer.  If it
> doesn't find "buf" at the start then it calls comint-send-input as
> usual.
>
> I've thought about doing this myself but I've never got around to it.
>
> BR,
> Robert Thorpe
>