bash-hackers-wiki/docs/syntax/keywords/coproc.md

# The coproc keyword

## Synopsis

     coproc [NAME] command [redirections]

## Description

Bash 4.0 introduced *coprocesses*, a feature certainly familiar to ksh
users. The `coproc` keyword starts a command as a background job,
setting up pipes connected to both its stdin and stdout so that you can
interact with it bidirectionally. Optionally, the co-process can have a
name `NAME`. If `NAME` is given, the command that follows **must be a
compound command**. If no `NAME` is given, then the command can be
either simple or compound.

The process ID of the shell spawned to execute the coprocess is
available through the value of the variable named by `NAME` followed by
a `_PID` suffix. For example, the variable name used to store the PID of
a coproc started with no `NAME` given would be `COPROC_PID` (because
`COPROC` is the default `NAME`). [wait](../../commands/builtin/wait.md) may be
used to wait for the coprocess to terminate. Additionally, coprocesses
may be manipulated through their `jobspec`.

### Return status

The return status of a coprocess is the exit status of its command.

### Redirections

The optional redirections are applied after the pipes have been set up.
Some examples:

``` bash
# redirecting stderr in the pipe
$ coproc { ls thisfiledoesntexist; read; } 2>&1
[2] 23084
$ IFS= read -ru ${COPROC[0]} x; printf '%s\n' "$x"
ls: cannot access thisfiledoesntexist: No such file or directory
```

``` bash
#let the output of the coprocess go to stdout
$ { coproc mycoproc { awk '{print "foo" $0;fflush()}'; } >&3; } 3>&1
[2] 23092
$ echo bar >&${mycoproc[1]}
$ foobar
```

Here we need to save the previous file descriptor of stdout, because by
the time we redirect the fds of the coprocess, stdout has already been
redirected to the pipe.

### Pitfalls

#### Avoid the final pipeline subshell

The traditional Ksh workaround to avoid the subshell when doing
`command | while read` is to use a coprocess. Unfortunately, Bash\'s
behavior differs.

In Ksh you would do:

``` bash
# ksh93 or mksh/pdksh derivatives
ls |& # start a coprocess
while IFS= read -rp file; do print -r -- "$file"; done # read its output
```

In bash:

``` bash
#DOESN'T WORK
$ coproc ls
[1] 23232
$ while IFS= read -ru ${COPROC[0]} line; do printf '%s\n' "$line"; done
bash: read: line: invalid file descriptor specification
[1]+  Done                    coproc COPROC ls
```

By the time we start reading from the output of the coprocess, the file
descriptor has been closed.

See [this FAQ entry on Greg\'s
wiki](http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/024) for other pipeline
subshell workarounds.

#### Buffering

In the first example, we GNU awk\'s `fflush()` command. As always, when
you use pipes the I/O operations are buffered. Let\'s see what happens
with `sed`:

``` bash
$ coproc sed s/^/foo/
[1] 22981
$ echo bar >&${COPROC[1]}
$ read -t 3 -ru ${COPROC[0]} _; (( $? > 127 )) && echo "nothing read"
nothing read
```

Even though this example is the same as the first `awk` example, the
`read` doesn\'t return because the output is waiting in a buffer.

See [this faq entry on Greg\'s
wiki](http://mywiki.wooledge.org/BashFAQ/009) for some workarounds and
more information on buffering issues.

#### background processes

A coprocess\' file descriptors are accessible only to the process from
which the `coproc` was started. They are not inherited by subshells.

Here is a not-so-meaningful illustration. Suppose we want to
continuously read the output of a coprocess and `echo` the result:

``` bash
#NOT WORKING
$ coproc awk '{print "foo" $0;fflush()}'
[2] 23100
$ while IFS= read -ru ${COPROC[0]} x; do printf '%s\n' "$x"; done &
[3] 23104
bash: line 243: read: 61: invalid file descriptor: Bad file descriptor
```

This fails because the file descriptors created by the parent are not
available to the subshell created by &.

A possible workaround:

``` bash
#WARNING: for illustration purpose ONLY
# this is not the way to make the coprocess print its output
# to stdout, see the redirections above.
$ coproc awk '{print "foo" $0;fflush()}'
[2] 23109
$ exec 3<&${COPROC[0]}
$ while IFS= read -ru 3 x; do printf '%s\n' "$x"; done &
[3] 23110
$ echo bar >&${COPROC[1]}
$ foobar
```

Here, fd 3 is inherited.

## Examples

### Anonymous Coprocess

Unlike ksh, Bash doesn\'t have true anonymous coprocesses. Instead, Bash
assigns FDs to a default array named `COPROC` if no `NAME` is supplied.
Here\'s an example:

``` bash
$ coproc awk '{print "foo" $0;fflush()}'
[1] 22978
```

This command starts in the background, and `coproc` returns immediately.
Two new file descriptors are now available via the `COPROC` array. We
can send data to our command:

``` bash
$ echo bar >&${COPROC[1]}
```

And then read its output:

``` bash
$ IFS= read -ru ${COPROC[0]} x; printf '%s\n' "$x"
foobar
```

When we don\'t need our command anymore, we can kill it via its pid:

    $ kill $COPROC_PID
    $
    [1]+  Terminated              coproc COPROC awk '{print "foo" $0;fflush()}'

### Named Coprocess

Using a named coprocess is simple. We just need a compound command (like
when defining a function), and the resulting FDs will be assigned to the
indexed array `NAME` we supply instead.

``` bash
$ coproc mycoproc { awk '{print "foo" $0;fflush()}' ;}
[1] 23058
$ echo bar >&${mycoproc[1]}
$ IFS= read -ru ${mycoproc[0]} x; printf '%s\n' "$x"
foobar
$ kill $mycoproc_PID
$
[1]+  Terminated              coproc mycoproc { awk '{print "foo" $0;fflush()}'; }
```

### Redirecting the output of a script to a file and to the screen

``` bash
#!/bin/bash
# we start tee in the background
# redirecting its output to the stdout of the script
{ coproc tee { tee logfile ;} >&3 ;} 3>&1 
# we redirect stding and stdout of the script to our coprocess
exec >&${tee[1]} 2>&1
```

## Portability considerations

-   The `coproc` keyword is not specified by POSIX(R)
-   The `coproc` keyword appeared in Bash version 4.0-alpha
-   The `-p` option to Bash\'s `print` loadable is a NOOP and not
    connected to Bash coprocesses in any way. It is only recognized as
    an option for ksh compatibility, and has no effect.
-   The `-p` option to Bash\'s `read` builtin conflicts with that of all
    kshes and zsh. The equivalent in those shells is to add a `\?prompt`
    suffix to the first variable name argument to `read`. i.e., if the
    first variable name given contains a `?` character, the remainder of
    the argument is used as the prompt string. Since this feature is
    pointless and redundant, I suggest not using it in either shell.
    Simply precede the `read` command with a `printf %s prompt >&2`.

### Other shells

ksh93, mksh, zsh, and Bash all support something called \"coprocesses\"
which all do approximately the same thing. ksh93 and mksh have virtually
identical syntax and semantics for coprocs. A *list* operator: `|&` is
added to the language which runs the preceding *pipeline* as a coprocess
(This is another reason not to use the special `|&` pipe operator in
Bash \-- its syntax is conflicting). The `-p` option to the `read` and
`print` builtins can then be used to read and write to the pipe of the
coprocess (whose FD isn\'t yet known). Special redirects are added to
move the last spawned coprocess to a different FD: `<&p` and `>&p`, at
which point it can be accessed at the new FD using ordinary redirection,
and another coprocess may then be started, again using `|&`.

zsh coprocesses are very similar to ksh except in the way they are
started. zsh adds the shell reserved word `coproc` to the pipeline
syntax (similar to the way Bash\'s `time` keyword works), so that the
pipeline that follows is started as a coproc. The coproc\'s input and
output FDs can then be accessed and moved using the same `read`/`print`
`-p` and redirects used by the ksh shells.

It is unfortunate that Bash chose to go against existing practice in
their coproc implementation, especially considering it was the last of
the major shells to incorporate this feature. However, Bash\'s method
accomplishes the same without requiring nearly as much additional
syntax. The `coproc` keyword is easy enough to wrap in a function such
that it takes Bash code as an ordinary argument and/or stdin like
`eval`. Coprocess functionality in other shells can be similarly wrapped
to create a `COPROC` array automatically.

### Only one coprocess at a time

The title says it all, complain to the bug-bash mailing list if you want
more. See
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/2011-04/msg00056.html> for
more details

The ability to use multiple coprocesses in Bash is considered
\"experimental\". Bash will throw an error if you attempt to start more
than one. This may be overridden at compile-time with the
`MULTIPLE_COPROCS` option. However, at this time there are still issues
\-- see the above mailing list discussion.

## See also

-   [Anthony Thyssen\'s Coprocess
    Hints](http://www.ict.griffith.edu.au/anthony/info/shell/co-processes.hints) -
    excellent summary of everything around the topic