Why use `cat` to view a file?Is there ever a reason to use `cat` when you've got `less`?Using More or Less in...

How can I fix this gap between bookcases I made?

Least quadratic residue under GRH: an explicit bound

New order #4: World

What is GPS' 19 year rollover and does it present a cybersecurity issue?

Is domain driven design an anti-SQL pattern?

Why is the design of haulage companies so “special”?

Is there a familial term for apples and pears?

How to make payment on the internet without leaving a money trail?

What does "enim et" mean?

Prime joint compound before latex paint?

Can you lasso down a wizard who is using the Levitate spell?

I’m planning on buying a laser printer but concerned about the life cycle of toner in the machine

Is it true that "The augmented fourth (A4) and the diminished fifth (d5) are the only aug and dim intervals that appear in diatonic scales"

Could a US political party gain complete control over the government by removing checks & balances?

Wild Shape Centaur Into a Giant Elk: do their Charges stack?

OA final episode explanation

How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?

Imbalanced dataset binary classification

Patience, young "Padovan"

Are white and non-white police officers equally likely to kill black suspects?

Was there ever an axiom rendered a theorem?

What is the command to reset a PC without deleting any files

Finding files for which a command fails

Why are hacking attempts coming from IP addresses owned by Google?



Why use `cat` to view a file?


Is there ever a reason to use `cat` when you've got `less`?Using More or Less in this ScenarioHow to make “less” exit with clearing the screen?Is there ever a reason to use `cat` when you've got `less`?How to use `cat` or `less` depending on the line count?How can I get less or cat to use color in the output from .cat of my .bashrc, similar to vi 'ing it?Are `less textfile | col` and `cat textfile` the same?Can 'less -F' be usefully combined with termcap initialization?cat [file..] pipe another cat commandWhy is `sudo cat /tmp/1 > file` wrong?less file1 file2 | cat — why does it work?Why cat command doesn't use its command environment?How to make “less” exit with clearing the screen?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







2















It seems that the purpose of cat is to concatenate several files. However, many people still use cat instead of less (or a similar program like more) to display a file. See, for example, the GNU m4 manual.




Man page: less



-F or --quit-if-one-screen



    Causes less to automatically exit if the entire file can be displayed on the first screen.



-X or --no-init



    Disables sending the termcap initialization and deinitialization strings to the terminal. This is sometimes desirable if the deinitialization string does something unnecessary, like clearing the screen.




Nowadays, is it a good practice to use cat to display or view a file? Why use cat to view a file?



This makes me think to Useless Use Of Cat.



Note: This question is not about the differences between less and more. Moreover, it concerns the visualization of a file created earlier.










share|improve this question




















  • 2





    If you know a file isn't that large, cat is easier: how many keystrokes do you need to type cat vs. less -F?

    – wurtel
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    And with cat you can continue your work in the same terminal and the output is still visible to lookup something, copy & paste etc.

    – Freddy
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    This question is going to generate a lot of personal opinion and blatant speculation, and little in the way of documented analyses or facts. Plus lengthy back and forth in comments of things that we already have questions and answers about, such as unix.stackexchange.com/q/463102/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/q/21548/5132 .

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago








  • 1





    I need an additional -X, otherwise I don't see anything for small files...

    – RoVo
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @Kusalananda: In general, c.f. GNU M4 manual.

    – Fólkvangr
    50 mins ago


















2















It seems that the purpose of cat is to concatenate several files. However, many people still use cat instead of less (or a similar program like more) to display a file. See, for example, the GNU m4 manual.




Man page: less



-F or --quit-if-one-screen



    Causes less to automatically exit if the entire file can be displayed on the first screen.



-X or --no-init



    Disables sending the termcap initialization and deinitialization strings to the terminal. This is sometimes desirable if the deinitialization string does something unnecessary, like clearing the screen.




Nowadays, is it a good practice to use cat to display or view a file? Why use cat to view a file?



This makes me think to Useless Use Of Cat.



Note: This question is not about the differences between less and more. Moreover, it concerns the visualization of a file created earlier.










share|improve this question




















  • 2





    If you know a file isn't that large, cat is easier: how many keystrokes do you need to type cat vs. less -F?

    – wurtel
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    And with cat you can continue your work in the same terminal and the output is still visible to lookup something, copy & paste etc.

    – Freddy
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    This question is going to generate a lot of personal opinion and blatant speculation, and little in the way of documented analyses or facts. Plus lengthy back and forth in comments of things that we already have questions and answers about, such as unix.stackexchange.com/q/463102/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/q/21548/5132 .

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago








  • 1





    I need an additional -X, otherwise I don't see anything for small files...

    – RoVo
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @Kusalananda: In general, c.f. GNU M4 manual.

    – Fólkvangr
    50 mins ago














2












2








2








It seems that the purpose of cat is to concatenate several files. However, many people still use cat instead of less (or a similar program like more) to display a file. See, for example, the GNU m4 manual.




Man page: less



-F or --quit-if-one-screen



    Causes less to automatically exit if the entire file can be displayed on the first screen.



-X or --no-init



    Disables sending the termcap initialization and deinitialization strings to the terminal. This is sometimes desirable if the deinitialization string does something unnecessary, like clearing the screen.




Nowadays, is it a good practice to use cat to display or view a file? Why use cat to view a file?



This makes me think to Useless Use Of Cat.



Note: This question is not about the differences between less and more. Moreover, it concerns the visualization of a file created earlier.










share|improve this question
















It seems that the purpose of cat is to concatenate several files. However, many people still use cat instead of less (or a similar program like more) to display a file. See, for example, the GNU m4 manual.




Man page: less



-F or --quit-if-one-screen



    Causes less to automatically exit if the entire file can be displayed on the first screen.



-X or --no-init



    Disables sending the termcap initialization and deinitialization strings to the terminal. This is sometimes desirable if the deinitialization string does something unnecessary, like clearing the screen.




Nowadays, is it a good practice to use cat to display or view a file? Why use cat to view a file?



This makes me think to Useless Use Of Cat.



Note: This question is not about the differences between less and more. Moreover, it concerns the visualization of a file created earlier.







text-processing cat less






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 12 mins ago









Kusalananda

140k17261435




140k17261435










asked 3 hours ago









FólkvangrFólkvangr

34214




34214








  • 2





    If you know a file isn't that large, cat is easier: how many keystrokes do you need to type cat vs. less -F?

    – wurtel
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    And with cat you can continue your work in the same terminal and the output is still visible to lookup something, copy & paste etc.

    – Freddy
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    This question is going to generate a lot of personal opinion and blatant speculation, and little in the way of documented analyses or facts. Plus lengthy back and forth in comments of things that we already have questions and answers about, such as unix.stackexchange.com/q/463102/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/q/21548/5132 .

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago








  • 1





    I need an additional -X, otherwise I don't see anything for small files...

    – RoVo
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @Kusalananda: In general, c.f. GNU M4 manual.

    – Fólkvangr
    50 mins ago














  • 2





    If you know a file isn't that large, cat is easier: how many keystrokes do you need to type cat vs. less -F?

    – wurtel
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    And with cat you can continue your work in the same terminal and the output is still visible to lookup something, copy & paste etc.

    – Freddy
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    This question is going to generate a lot of personal opinion and blatant speculation, and little in the way of documented analyses or facts. Plus lengthy back and forth in comments of things that we already have questions and answers about, such as unix.stackexchange.com/q/463102/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/q/21548/5132 .

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago








  • 1





    I need an additional -X, otherwise I don't see anything for small files...

    – RoVo
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @Kusalananda: In general, c.f. GNU M4 manual.

    – Fólkvangr
    50 mins ago








2




2





If you know a file isn't that large, cat is easier: how many keystrokes do you need to type cat vs. less -F?

– wurtel
2 hours ago





If you know a file isn't that large, cat is easier: how many keystrokes do you need to type cat vs. less -F?

– wurtel
2 hours ago




1




1





And with cat you can continue your work in the same terminal and the output is still visible to lookup something, copy & paste etc.

– Freddy
2 hours ago





And with cat you can continue your work in the same terminal and the output is still visible to lookup something, copy & paste etc.

– Freddy
2 hours ago




2




2





This question is going to generate a lot of personal opinion and blatant speculation, and little in the way of documented analyses or facts. Plus lengthy back and forth in comments of things that we already have questions and answers about, such as unix.stackexchange.com/q/463102/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/q/21548/5132 .

– JdeBP
2 hours ago







This question is going to generate a lot of personal opinion and blatant speculation, and little in the way of documented analyses or facts. Plus lengthy back and forth in comments of things that we already have questions and answers about, such as unix.stackexchange.com/q/463102/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/q/21548/5132 .

– JdeBP
2 hours ago






1




1





I need an additional -X, otherwise I don't see anything for small files...

– RoVo
2 hours ago





I need an additional -X, otherwise I don't see anything for small files...

– RoVo
2 hours ago




1




1





@Kusalananda: In general, c.f. GNU M4 manual.

– Fólkvangr
50 mins ago





@Kusalananda: In general, c.f. GNU M4 manual.

– Fólkvangr
50 mins ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















3














I'm going to assume that the "many people" in the question refers to people writing tutorials, manuals, or answers on web-sites such as this one.



When writing terminal commands in a text document, the cat command is commonly used to show the contents of a file.



An example of this:



$ cat script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'




$ chmod +x script.sh




$ ./script.sh
hello


Here, I show that I have a file called script.sh, what its contents is, that I'm making it executable and that I'm running it and what the result of that is.



Using cat in this example is just a way of "showing all one's cards", i.e. to explicitly display all the prerequisites for an example (and doing it as part of a textual representation of a terminal session).



less and other screen based pagers, depending on how they are used, would not necessarily give that output in the terminal. So if I wrote



$ less script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'


and a user tried it by themselves, they may wonder why the text of the script appears different in their terminal and then disappears from the terminal once they closed the less pager (if that's the way they've configured the pager), or whether their less is different from the less used in the answer (or tutorial or whatever it may be), or if they're doing something else wrong. Allowing for the possibility of this train of thought is counterproductive and disruptive for the user.



Using cat when showing an example in the terminal as text is good as it gives a fairly easy way of reproducing the exact same results as in the given text. For larger files, it may be better to show the file separately, and then concentrate on how that file is used when writing the terminal command as text.



If you prefer to use less, more, most, view, sublime, or some other pager or program to view files, that's totally fine. Go ahead and do that. But if you want to provide a reproducible text describing some workflow in the terminal, you would have to also give the user a warning that the output may differ between what they read and what they see in their own terminal, depending on what pager is used and how it's configured.






share|improve this answer


























  • In my opinion, the reader should be informed as you say in your answer; e.g. using cat to display a file: why does this text disappear on the screen?.

    – Fólkvangr
    17 mins ago





















4














less is a non-standard GNU utility.



cat is POSIX:




     The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7, 2018 edition
IEEE Std 1003.1-2017 (Revision of IEEE Std 1003.1-2008)
Copyright © 2001-2018 IEEE and The Open Group






NAME



cat - concatenate and print files



SYNOPSIS



cat [-u] [file...]


...




cat is more likely to exist and to have consistent behavior.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2





    That argument rather falls over when it turns out that so too is more. (-:

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @JdeBP True, but the question refers to less quite specifically, relegating more to a footnote - literally. I'm also pretty sure that footnote wasn't in the original posting (edits made in the first few minutes don't show).

    – Andrew Henle
    2 hours ago











  • @JdeBP Except more does not have the additional functionality of less and still requires more keystrokes, and different commands/function keys, to do things. There are several ways to do almost EVERYTHING in *NIX. Often there is no single "correct" way of doing it (all things being equal). Now, if you need a method that does not spawn additional processes, or have other esoteric limitations, then certainly the ability to do things multiple ways is good.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago













  • The question is not asking about additional functionality, and as even M. Henle acknowledges, explicitly includes more in what it is asking about. An argument that only the cat program in the question is standard falls over because it isn't true. It's as simple as that. Remember where I wrote about comment discussions that address things that we already have Q&As about? Here you are doing it. Read unix.stackexchange.com/a/333946/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/a/340511/5132 for starters.

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago





















3














IMHO, I guess it's an "old / bad" habit. Myself, I always use cat because I do not think about less that is more suitable.
If you try to display the contents of a binary file, less asks if you agree to display it anyway and automatically paginates a text when it is long.
Cat is short to write and is easy to use for very short files that do not require paging.
Nevertheless, it is indeed intended for concatenation. In this case, used to display text, it performs a concatenation on the standard output of the file given in argument 1 and the standard input which is the default of argument 2.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    I'm with you, but I don't feel there is anything "bad" about the habit. Purely a preference thing, given the other reasons that have also been listed.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago











  • The user can type less and use export LESS=-FX or alias less='less -FX' in its shell initialization file. These options allow to display a file like cat.

    – Fólkvangr
    1 hour ago













  • @Fólkvangr: not a good idea when you need to work on a lot of systems.

    – RoVo
    1 hour ago














Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f511232%2fwhy-use-cat-to-view-a-file%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









3














I'm going to assume that the "many people" in the question refers to people writing tutorials, manuals, or answers on web-sites such as this one.



When writing terminal commands in a text document, the cat command is commonly used to show the contents of a file.



An example of this:



$ cat script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'




$ chmod +x script.sh




$ ./script.sh
hello


Here, I show that I have a file called script.sh, what its contents is, that I'm making it executable and that I'm running it and what the result of that is.



Using cat in this example is just a way of "showing all one's cards", i.e. to explicitly display all the prerequisites for an example (and doing it as part of a textual representation of a terminal session).



less and other screen based pagers, depending on how they are used, would not necessarily give that output in the terminal. So if I wrote



$ less script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'


and a user tried it by themselves, they may wonder why the text of the script appears different in their terminal and then disappears from the terminal once they closed the less pager (if that's the way they've configured the pager), or whether their less is different from the less used in the answer (or tutorial or whatever it may be), or if they're doing something else wrong. Allowing for the possibility of this train of thought is counterproductive and disruptive for the user.



Using cat when showing an example in the terminal as text is good as it gives a fairly easy way of reproducing the exact same results as in the given text. For larger files, it may be better to show the file separately, and then concentrate on how that file is used when writing the terminal command as text.



If you prefer to use less, more, most, view, sublime, or some other pager or program to view files, that's totally fine. Go ahead and do that. But if you want to provide a reproducible text describing some workflow in the terminal, you would have to also give the user a warning that the output may differ between what they read and what they see in their own terminal, depending on what pager is used and how it's configured.






share|improve this answer


























  • In my opinion, the reader should be informed as you say in your answer; e.g. using cat to display a file: why does this text disappear on the screen?.

    – Fólkvangr
    17 mins ago


















3














I'm going to assume that the "many people" in the question refers to people writing tutorials, manuals, or answers on web-sites such as this one.



When writing terminal commands in a text document, the cat command is commonly used to show the contents of a file.



An example of this:



$ cat script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'




$ chmod +x script.sh




$ ./script.sh
hello


Here, I show that I have a file called script.sh, what its contents is, that I'm making it executable and that I'm running it and what the result of that is.



Using cat in this example is just a way of "showing all one's cards", i.e. to explicitly display all the prerequisites for an example (and doing it as part of a textual representation of a terminal session).



less and other screen based pagers, depending on how they are used, would not necessarily give that output in the terminal. So if I wrote



$ less script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'


and a user tried it by themselves, they may wonder why the text of the script appears different in their terminal and then disappears from the terminal once they closed the less pager (if that's the way they've configured the pager), or whether their less is different from the less used in the answer (or tutorial or whatever it may be), or if they're doing something else wrong. Allowing for the possibility of this train of thought is counterproductive and disruptive for the user.



Using cat when showing an example in the terminal as text is good as it gives a fairly easy way of reproducing the exact same results as in the given text. For larger files, it may be better to show the file separately, and then concentrate on how that file is used when writing the terminal command as text.



If you prefer to use less, more, most, view, sublime, or some other pager or program to view files, that's totally fine. Go ahead and do that. But if you want to provide a reproducible text describing some workflow in the terminal, you would have to also give the user a warning that the output may differ between what they read and what they see in their own terminal, depending on what pager is used and how it's configured.






share|improve this answer


























  • In my opinion, the reader should be informed as you say in your answer; e.g. using cat to display a file: why does this text disappear on the screen?.

    – Fólkvangr
    17 mins ago
















3












3








3







I'm going to assume that the "many people" in the question refers to people writing tutorials, manuals, or answers on web-sites such as this one.



When writing terminal commands in a text document, the cat command is commonly used to show the contents of a file.



An example of this:



$ cat script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'




$ chmod +x script.sh




$ ./script.sh
hello


Here, I show that I have a file called script.sh, what its contents is, that I'm making it executable and that I'm running it and what the result of that is.



Using cat in this example is just a way of "showing all one's cards", i.e. to explicitly display all the prerequisites for an example (and doing it as part of a textual representation of a terminal session).



less and other screen based pagers, depending on how they are used, would not necessarily give that output in the terminal. So if I wrote



$ less script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'


and a user tried it by themselves, they may wonder why the text of the script appears different in their terminal and then disappears from the terminal once they closed the less pager (if that's the way they've configured the pager), or whether their less is different from the less used in the answer (or tutorial or whatever it may be), or if they're doing something else wrong. Allowing for the possibility of this train of thought is counterproductive and disruptive for the user.



Using cat when showing an example in the terminal as text is good as it gives a fairly easy way of reproducing the exact same results as in the given text. For larger files, it may be better to show the file separately, and then concentrate on how that file is used when writing the terminal command as text.



If you prefer to use less, more, most, view, sublime, or some other pager or program to view files, that's totally fine. Go ahead and do that. But if you want to provide a reproducible text describing some workflow in the terminal, you would have to also give the user a warning that the output may differ between what they read and what they see in their own terminal, depending on what pager is used and how it's configured.






share|improve this answer















I'm going to assume that the "many people" in the question refers to people writing tutorials, manuals, or answers on web-sites such as this one.



When writing terminal commands in a text document, the cat command is commonly used to show the contents of a file.



An example of this:



$ cat script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'




$ chmod +x script.sh




$ ./script.sh
hello


Here, I show that I have a file called script.sh, what its contents is, that I'm making it executable and that I'm running it and what the result of that is.



Using cat in this example is just a way of "showing all one's cards", i.e. to explicitly display all the prerequisites for an example (and doing it as part of a textual representation of a terminal session).



less and other screen based pagers, depending on how they are used, would not necessarily give that output in the terminal. So if I wrote



$ less script.sh
#!/bin/sh
echo 'hello'


and a user tried it by themselves, they may wonder why the text of the script appears different in their terminal and then disappears from the terminal once they closed the less pager (if that's the way they've configured the pager), or whether their less is different from the less used in the answer (or tutorial or whatever it may be), or if they're doing something else wrong. Allowing for the possibility of this train of thought is counterproductive and disruptive for the user.



Using cat when showing an example in the terminal as text is good as it gives a fairly easy way of reproducing the exact same results as in the given text. For larger files, it may be better to show the file separately, and then concentrate on how that file is used when writing the terminal command as text.



If you prefer to use less, more, most, view, sublime, or some other pager or program to view files, that's totally fine. Go ahead and do that. But if you want to provide a reproducible text describing some workflow in the terminal, you would have to also give the user a warning that the output may differ between what they read and what they see in their own terminal, depending on what pager is used and how it's configured.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 8 mins ago

























answered 42 mins ago









KusalanandaKusalananda

140k17261435




140k17261435













  • In my opinion, the reader should be informed as you say in your answer; e.g. using cat to display a file: why does this text disappear on the screen?.

    – Fólkvangr
    17 mins ago





















  • In my opinion, the reader should be informed as you say in your answer; e.g. using cat to display a file: why does this text disappear on the screen?.

    – Fólkvangr
    17 mins ago



















In my opinion, the reader should be informed as you say in your answer; e.g. using cat to display a file: why does this text disappear on the screen?.

– Fólkvangr
17 mins ago







In my opinion, the reader should be informed as you say in your answer; e.g. using cat to display a file: why does this text disappear on the screen?.

– Fólkvangr
17 mins ago















4














less is a non-standard GNU utility.



cat is POSIX:




     The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7, 2018 edition
IEEE Std 1003.1-2017 (Revision of IEEE Std 1003.1-2008)
Copyright © 2001-2018 IEEE and The Open Group






NAME



cat - concatenate and print files



SYNOPSIS



cat [-u] [file...]


...




cat is more likely to exist and to have consistent behavior.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2





    That argument rather falls over when it turns out that so too is more. (-:

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @JdeBP True, but the question refers to less quite specifically, relegating more to a footnote - literally. I'm also pretty sure that footnote wasn't in the original posting (edits made in the first few minutes don't show).

    – Andrew Henle
    2 hours ago











  • @JdeBP Except more does not have the additional functionality of less and still requires more keystrokes, and different commands/function keys, to do things. There are several ways to do almost EVERYTHING in *NIX. Often there is no single "correct" way of doing it (all things being equal). Now, if you need a method that does not spawn additional processes, or have other esoteric limitations, then certainly the ability to do things multiple ways is good.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago













  • The question is not asking about additional functionality, and as even M. Henle acknowledges, explicitly includes more in what it is asking about. An argument that only the cat program in the question is standard falls over because it isn't true. It's as simple as that. Remember where I wrote about comment discussions that address things that we already have Q&As about? Here you are doing it. Read unix.stackexchange.com/a/333946/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/a/340511/5132 for starters.

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago


















4














less is a non-standard GNU utility.



cat is POSIX:




     The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7, 2018 edition
IEEE Std 1003.1-2017 (Revision of IEEE Std 1003.1-2008)
Copyright © 2001-2018 IEEE and The Open Group






NAME



cat - concatenate and print files



SYNOPSIS



cat [-u] [file...]


...




cat is more likely to exist and to have consistent behavior.






share|improve this answer



















  • 2





    That argument rather falls over when it turns out that so too is more. (-:

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @JdeBP True, but the question refers to less quite specifically, relegating more to a footnote - literally. I'm also pretty sure that footnote wasn't in the original posting (edits made in the first few minutes don't show).

    – Andrew Henle
    2 hours ago











  • @JdeBP Except more does not have the additional functionality of less and still requires more keystrokes, and different commands/function keys, to do things. There are several ways to do almost EVERYTHING in *NIX. Often there is no single "correct" way of doing it (all things being equal). Now, if you need a method that does not spawn additional processes, or have other esoteric limitations, then certainly the ability to do things multiple ways is good.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago













  • The question is not asking about additional functionality, and as even M. Henle acknowledges, explicitly includes more in what it is asking about. An argument that only the cat program in the question is standard falls over because it isn't true. It's as simple as that. Remember where I wrote about comment discussions that address things that we already have Q&As about? Here you are doing it. Read unix.stackexchange.com/a/333946/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/a/340511/5132 for starters.

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago
















4












4








4







less is a non-standard GNU utility.



cat is POSIX:




     The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7, 2018 edition
IEEE Std 1003.1-2017 (Revision of IEEE Std 1003.1-2008)
Copyright © 2001-2018 IEEE and The Open Group






NAME



cat - concatenate and print files



SYNOPSIS



cat [-u] [file...]


...




cat is more likely to exist and to have consistent behavior.






share|improve this answer













less is a non-standard GNU utility.



cat is POSIX:




     The Open Group Base Specifications Issue 7, 2018 edition
IEEE Std 1003.1-2017 (Revision of IEEE Std 1003.1-2008)
Copyright © 2001-2018 IEEE and The Open Group






NAME



cat - concatenate and print files



SYNOPSIS



cat [-u] [file...]


...




cat is more likely to exist and to have consistent behavior.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 2 hours ago









Andrew HenleAndrew Henle

2,827911




2,827911








  • 2





    That argument rather falls over when it turns out that so too is more. (-:

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @JdeBP True, but the question refers to less quite specifically, relegating more to a footnote - literally. I'm also pretty sure that footnote wasn't in the original posting (edits made in the first few minutes don't show).

    – Andrew Henle
    2 hours ago











  • @JdeBP Except more does not have the additional functionality of less and still requires more keystrokes, and different commands/function keys, to do things. There are several ways to do almost EVERYTHING in *NIX. Often there is no single "correct" way of doing it (all things being equal). Now, if you need a method that does not spawn additional processes, or have other esoteric limitations, then certainly the ability to do things multiple ways is good.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago













  • The question is not asking about additional functionality, and as even M. Henle acknowledges, explicitly includes more in what it is asking about. An argument that only the cat program in the question is standard falls over because it isn't true. It's as simple as that. Remember where I wrote about comment discussions that address things that we already have Q&As about? Here you are doing it. Read unix.stackexchange.com/a/333946/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/a/340511/5132 for starters.

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago
















  • 2





    That argument rather falls over when it turns out that so too is more. (-:

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @JdeBP True, but the question refers to less quite specifically, relegating more to a footnote - literally. I'm also pretty sure that footnote wasn't in the original posting (edits made in the first few minutes don't show).

    – Andrew Henle
    2 hours ago











  • @JdeBP Except more does not have the additional functionality of less and still requires more keystrokes, and different commands/function keys, to do things. There are several ways to do almost EVERYTHING in *NIX. Often there is no single "correct" way of doing it (all things being equal). Now, if you need a method that does not spawn additional processes, or have other esoteric limitations, then certainly the ability to do things multiple ways is good.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago













  • The question is not asking about additional functionality, and as even M. Henle acknowledges, explicitly includes more in what it is asking about. An argument that only the cat program in the question is standard falls over because it isn't true. It's as simple as that. Remember where I wrote about comment discussions that address things that we already have Q&As about? Here you are doing it. Read unix.stackexchange.com/a/333946/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/a/340511/5132 for starters.

    – JdeBP
    2 hours ago










2




2





That argument rather falls over when it turns out that so too is more. (-:

– JdeBP
2 hours ago





That argument rather falls over when it turns out that so too is more. (-:

– JdeBP
2 hours ago




1




1





@JdeBP True, but the question refers to less quite specifically, relegating more to a footnote - literally. I'm also pretty sure that footnote wasn't in the original posting (edits made in the first few minutes don't show).

– Andrew Henle
2 hours ago





@JdeBP True, but the question refers to less quite specifically, relegating more to a footnote - literally. I'm also pretty sure that footnote wasn't in the original posting (edits made in the first few minutes don't show).

– Andrew Henle
2 hours ago













@JdeBP Except more does not have the additional functionality of less and still requires more keystrokes, and different commands/function keys, to do things. There are several ways to do almost EVERYTHING in *NIX. Often there is no single "correct" way of doing it (all things being equal). Now, if you need a method that does not spawn additional processes, or have other esoteric limitations, then certainly the ability to do things multiple ways is good.

– 0xSheepdog
2 hours ago







@JdeBP Except more does not have the additional functionality of less and still requires more keystrokes, and different commands/function keys, to do things. There are several ways to do almost EVERYTHING in *NIX. Often there is no single "correct" way of doing it (all things being equal). Now, if you need a method that does not spawn additional processes, or have other esoteric limitations, then certainly the ability to do things multiple ways is good.

– 0xSheepdog
2 hours ago















The question is not asking about additional functionality, and as even M. Henle acknowledges, explicitly includes more in what it is asking about. An argument that only the cat program in the question is standard falls over because it isn't true. It's as simple as that. Remember where I wrote about comment discussions that address things that we already have Q&As about? Here you are doing it. Read unix.stackexchange.com/a/333946/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/a/340511/5132 for starters.

– JdeBP
2 hours ago







The question is not asking about additional functionality, and as even M. Henle acknowledges, explicitly includes more in what it is asking about. An argument that only the cat program in the question is standard falls over because it isn't true. It's as simple as that. Remember where I wrote about comment discussions that address things that we already have Q&As about? Here you are doing it. Read unix.stackexchange.com/a/333946/5132 and unix.stackexchange.com/a/340511/5132 for starters.

– JdeBP
2 hours ago













3














IMHO, I guess it's an "old / bad" habit. Myself, I always use cat because I do not think about less that is more suitable.
If you try to display the contents of a binary file, less asks if you agree to display it anyway and automatically paginates a text when it is long.
Cat is short to write and is easy to use for very short files that do not require paging.
Nevertheless, it is indeed intended for concatenation. In this case, used to display text, it performs a concatenation on the standard output of the file given in argument 1 and the standard input which is the default of argument 2.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    I'm with you, but I don't feel there is anything "bad" about the habit. Purely a preference thing, given the other reasons that have also been listed.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago











  • The user can type less and use export LESS=-FX or alias less='less -FX' in its shell initialization file. These options allow to display a file like cat.

    – Fólkvangr
    1 hour ago













  • @Fólkvangr: not a good idea when you need to work on a lot of systems.

    – RoVo
    1 hour ago


















3














IMHO, I guess it's an "old / bad" habit. Myself, I always use cat because I do not think about less that is more suitable.
If you try to display the contents of a binary file, less asks if you agree to display it anyway and automatically paginates a text when it is long.
Cat is short to write and is easy to use for very short files that do not require paging.
Nevertheless, it is indeed intended for concatenation. In this case, used to display text, it performs a concatenation on the standard output of the file given in argument 1 and the standard input which is the default of argument 2.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    I'm with you, but I don't feel there is anything "bad" about the habit. Purely a preference thing, given the other reasons that have also been listed.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago











  • The user can type less and use export LESS=-FX or alias less='less -FX' in its shell initialization file. These options allow to display a file like cat.

    – Fólkvangr
    1 hour ago













  • @Fólkvangr: not a good idea when you need to work on a lot of systems.

    – RoVo
    1 hour ago
















3












3








3







IMHO, I guess it's an "old / bad" habit. Myself, I always use cat because I do not think about less that is more suitable.
If you try to display the contents of a binary file, less asks if you agree to display it anyway and automatically paginates a text when it is long.
Cat is short to write and is easy to use for very short files that do not require paging.
Nevertheless, it is indeed intended for concatenation. In this case, used to display text, it performs a concatenation on the standard output of the file given in argument 1 and the standard input which is the default of argument 2.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










IMHO, I guess it's an "old / bad" habit. Myself, I always use cat because I do not think about less that is more suitable.
If you try to display the contents of a binary file, less asks if you agree to display it anyway and automatically paginates a text when it is long.
Cat is short to write and is easy to use for very short files that do not require paging.
Nevertheless, it is indeed intended for concatenation. In this case, used to display text, it performs a concatenation on the standard output of the file given in argument 1 and the standard input which is the default of argument 2.







share|improve this answer








New contributor




PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer






New contributor




PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 2 hours ago









PhLinuXPhLinuX

364




364




New contributor




PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






PhLinuX is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1





    I'm with you, but I don't feel there is anything "bad" about the habit. Purely a preference thing, given the other reasons that have also been listed.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago











  • The user can type less and use export LESS=-FX or alias less='less -FX' in its shell initialization file. These options allow to display a file like cat.

    – Fólkvangr
    1 hour ago













  • @Fólkvangr: not a good idea when you need to work on a lot of systems.

    – RoVo
    1 hour ago
















  • 1





    I'm with you, but I don't feel there is anything "bad" about the habit. Purely a preference thing, given the other reasons that have also been listed.

    – 0xSheepdog
    2 hours ago











  • The user can type less and use export LESS=-FX or alias less='less -FX' in its shell initialization file. These options allow to display a file like cat.

    – Fólkvangr
    1 hour ago













  • @Fólkvangr: not a good idea when you need to work on a lot of systems.

    – RoVo
    1 hour ago










1




1





I'm with you, but I don't feel there is anything "bad" about the habit. Purely a preference thing, given the other reasons that have also been listed.

– 0xSheepdog
2 hours ago





I'm with you, but I don't feel there is anything "bad" about the habit. Purely a preference thing, given the other reasons that have also been listed.

– 0xSheepdog
2 hours ago













The user can type less and use export LESS=-FX or alias less='less -FX' in its shell initialization file. These options allow to display a file like cat.

– Fólkvangr
1 hour ago







The user can type less and use export LESS=-FX or alias less='less -FX' in its shell initialization file. These options allow to display a file like cat.

– Fólkvangr
1 hour ago















@Fólkvangr: not a good idea when you need to work on a lot of systems.

– RoVo
1 hour ago







@Fólkvangr: not a good idea when you need to work on a lot of systems.

– RoVo
1 hour ago




















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f511232%2fwhy-use-cat-to-view-a-file%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Gersau Kjelder | Navigasjonsmeny46°59′0″N 8°31′0″E46°59′0″N...

Nässjö kommun Tettstader | Kjelder | NavigasjonsmenyeVIAFISNIGeoNamesMusicBrainz (area)

Kvitkval Innhaldsliste Taksonomi og utvikling | Utsjånad og levevis | Utbreiing | Åtferd |...