3

I've come across a situation where it would be convenient to use python within a bash script I'm writing. I call some executables within my script, then want to do a bit of light data processing with python, then carry on. It doesn't seem worth it to me to write a dedicated script for the processing.

So what I want to do is something like the following:

# do some stuff in bash script
# write some data into datafile.d

python_fragment= << EOF
f = open("datafile.d")
// do some stuff with opened file
print(result)
EOF

result=$(execute_python_fragment $python_fragment) # <- what I want to do

# do some stuff with result

Basically all I want to do is execute a string containing python code. I could of course just make another file containing the python code and execute that, but I'd prefer not to do so. I could do something like echo $python_fragment > temp_code_file, then execute temp_code_file, but that seems inelegant. I just want to execute the string directly, if that's possible.

What I want to do seems simple enough, but haven't figured it out or found the solution online.

Thanks!

Improve this question

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
5

You can run a python command direct from the command line with -c option

python -c 'from foo import hello; print (hello())'

Then with bash you could do something like

result=$(python -c '$python_fragment')
Improve this answer
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

2

You only have to redirect that here-string/document to python

python <<< "print('Hello')"

or

python <<EOF
print('Hello')
EOF

and encapsulate that in a function

execute_python_fragment() {
    python <<< "$1"
}

and now you can do your

result=$(execute_python_fragment "${python_fragment}")

You should also add some kind of error control, input sanitizing... it's up to you the level of security you need in this function.

Improve this answer

4 Comments

The <<< redirection is new to me, thanks for bringing it up. It appears that works internally just by writing the here-string to a temporary file, but at least it's not me worrying about that!
It's similar to the here-document, but with a string/variable. I don't know how it works internally, it is up to the implementation provided by the shell, but I'm surprised it uses any file. Either case, redirections in general (<, << and <<<) are always useful to avoid the common cases of UUoC and UUoE (Useless Use of Cat and Useless Use of Echo): they are performed by the shell without having to create an extra process for cat/echo.
Why do you need a first EOF?
@Sereyn you asked this a long time ago, but the answer is that the word immediately following << is used to indicate where the document ends (it must be found alone, on its own line). So it can actually be any word, using EOF is just a convention. The word HERE is also common. Also a side note—the shell will still perform variable expansions in the doc by default (meaning you must escape $ characters), as if it were a string in double-quotes. You can disable that by placing single-quotes around the word (like <<‘HERE’ instead of <<HERE).
0

If the string contains the exact python code, then this simple eval() function works.

Here's a really basic example:

>>> eval("print(2)")
2

Hope that helps.

Improve this answer

Comments

0

maybe something like

result=$(echo $python_fragment | python3)

only problem is the heredoc assignment in the question doesn't work either. But https://stackoverflow.com/a/1167849 suggests a way to do it if that is what you want to do:

python_fragment=$(cat <<EOF
print('test message')
EOF
) ;

result=$(echo $python_fragment | python3)

echo result was $result
Improve this answer

Comments

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.