On: Unix Commands I Abuse Every Day

[gnaritas]

    find ./ -name '*.log' -print0 | xargs -0 rm

Fixes that issue and xargs is far more efficient, it doesn't launch a new process for each line like exec does, but far more importantly, xargs is generalizable to all commands so you only have to learn it once; exec is just an ugly hack on find, you can't generalize it across all commands; xargs is much more unixy.

[masklinn → gnaritas]

> it doesn't launch a new process for each line like exec does

Exec doesn't either if you use "+" as a terminator:

    find . $(options) -exec command {} \;

executes one command per match,

    find . $(options) -exec command {} +

executes a single command with all matches

> exec is just an ugly hack on find

Obvious and complete nonsense, -exec is both an important predicate of find and a useful and efficient tool.

-print0/xargs -0, now that is a hack.

[gnaritas → masklinn]

You apparently missed the part where I said "but far more importantly".

[masklinn → gnaritas]

No, that's just your opinion and you're entitled to it so I don't care, the rest is factually incorrect.

[gnaritas → masklinn]

Oh, I agree on the + thing, I wasn't aware of that option, however, it doesn't make exec any more generalizable across commands which is what matters.

[ralph → gnaritas]

Wanting to remove the files was so common that some finds have it built-in. Avoids even the overhead of -exec rm {} +.

    find -name '*.log' -delete

[gnaritas → ralph]

True, but the issue isn't removing files, the issue is generalizing a command for mapping output of a command to another command. rm was just a simple example. xargs is far more useful than simply deleting files.

[ralph → gnaritas]

Removing files is a common need coupled with find yet many readers don't know of -delete; I was pointing it out. That doesn't weaken xargs's valid uses. You seem a little defensive? :-)

[gnaritas → ralph]

Too much reddit perhaps. I use the delete switch myself regularly.