Get run command from stdout

[prihoda]

Hi, I'm often running multiple commands in dvc run, which can be done by wrapping the command in quotes:

dvc run -d in.txt -o out.txt 'cp in.txt out.txt; for i in {1..10}; do echo ${i} >> out.txt; done'
# Running command:
# 	cp in.txt out.txt; for i in {1..10}; do echo ${i} >> out.txt; done

It would be nice if I could input the command using stdout prompt instead, e.g. by running:

dvc run -d in.txt -o out.txt --interactive
# > Enter command:
cp in.txt out.txt; for i in {1..10}; do echo ${i} >> out.txt; done
# Running command:
# 	cp in.txt out.txt; for i in {1..10}; do echo ${i} >> out.txt; done

[prihoda]

First I thought this could be done automatically when the command is not provided, but I see that in that case, it's already handled as copying (or linking?) the dependency to the output, which also makes sense. But still, it's a shame that it's taken 😄

[prihoda]

Also, you could inject each dependency as $1, $2, etc. and show a hint before asking for the command. And possibly $@ for output (Makefile style).

dvc run -d in.txt -o out.txt --interactive
# Dependencies
# $1: in.txt
# Output
# $@: out.txt
# > Enter command:
cp $1 $@; for i in {1..10}; do echo ${i} >> $@; done

It would be nice to use same notation as Makefile:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/3220288/6845735
but that seems too messy 😄
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/12284584/can-i-obtain-just-the-second-prerequisite-in-gnu-make

Edit: Just learned that $1 can probably not be used as variable name, we would have to use something else.

[ghost]

I'm not sure about this one, @prihoda.

Why won't you write a script instead?
If you want to format your output in the prompt, just open a quote

dvc run -d in.txt -o out.txt '
cp in.txt > out.txt
for i in {1..10}; do
  echo ${i} >> out.txt
done
'

[ghost]

About the other suggestion of using variables for input and dependencies, I don't think it would bring to much value, to be honest; the commands are already interpreted by a shell, so you can have globbing, for example: dvc run -o out 'cat *.txt > out'.

I guess the cool think about having "special variables" in Makefiles are the implicit rules. For example, this Makefile: https://github.com/mroutis/bgc/blob/master/Makefile

For the first rule $(NAME) I only defined the target but no the body, and that's because there's already implicit rules that execute what I want for me. It's pretty cool, but I don't think of any dvc use case that can take any approach on having implicit rules.

[efiop]

@prihoda In order to handle all the line breaks and possible open parenthesis, we would have to implement a mini shell for --interactive, which I don't think should be our focus. As @MrOutis suggested, you can just use a separate script or embed your command into quotes, so shell could handle everything for you.

@MrOutis @MrOutis The problem with dvc run -o out 'cat *.txt > out' is that you can't specify your dependencies with it, as you can with Makefile. Those special variables and globing are a first step to implicit rules, since a rule is usually defined with a glob and other special vars, e.g.

%.o: %.c $(DEPS)
	$(CC) -c -o $@ $< $(CFLAGS)

I'm sure that we will have to support some variable expansion and similar tricks eventually 🙂

[ghost]

That's true @efiop !

     run_parser.add_argument(
                         '-d',
                         '--deps',
-                        action='append',
-                        default=[],
+                        nargs='+',
                         help='Declare dependencies for reproducible cmd.')
     run_parser.add_argument(
                         '-o',

Sadly, this will break backwards compatibility, but it would enable the following syntax:
dvc run -d *.txt -o out 'cat *.txt > out'

[efiop]

@MrOutis I've meant that Makefile expands those variables dynamically(e.g. each time you run make), while dvc in your example would bake all of the *.txt dependencies into a dvc file once. 🙂

Also, if you would do

     run_parser.add_argument(
                         '-d',
                         '--deps',
-                        action='append',
-                        default=[],
+                        nargs='+',
                         help='Declare dependencies for reproducible cmd.')
     run_parser.add_argument(
                         '-o',

it might interfere with the command, which is defined as a REMAINDER. In your example you are lucky because you didn't specify -d option last before your command. If you would to do that, there would be no way for a parser to distinguish between where the deps end and where the commands starts:

(dvc) ➜  tmp git:(master) ✗ dvc run -o out.txt -d *.txt 'cat *.txt > out' 
Running command:
	
Error: Failed to run command: missing dependency: cat *.txt > out

Having any troubles? Hit us up at dvc.org/support, we are always happy to help

[ghost]

In your example you are lucky because you didn't specify -d option last before your command. If you would to do that, there would be no way for a parser to distinguish between where the deps end and where the commands starts.

Indeed, @efiop , introducing a --cmd flag or handling -- correctly to stop the parser could work, however, I wasn't taking into account Windows users (maybe globbing wouldn't work the same way), so it would be nice to have some agnostic / non-shell dependent way to handle this 👍

[prihoda]

Thanks guys for the replies! Yeah sometimes I don't realize that it's actually not that easy 😄This can already be accomplished using the existing features, so I don't mind if it's not implemented.

[efiop]

Looks like we could close this. Please feel free to reopen, if I've missed something.