It is a block buffering issue.
What follows is an extended for your case version of my answer to Python: read streaming input from subprocess.communicate() question.
Fix stdout buffer in C program directly
stdio-based programs as a rule are line buffered if they are running interactively in a terminal and block buffered when their stdout is redirected to a pipe. In the latter case, you won't see new lines until the buffer overflows or flushed.
To avoid calling fflush() after each printf() call, you could force line buffered output by calling in a C program at the very beginning:
setvbuf(stdout, (char *) NULL, _IOLBF, 0); /* make line buffered stdout */
As soon as a newline is printed the buffer is flushed in this case.
Or fix it without modifying the source of C program
There is stdbuf utility that allows you to change buffering type without modifying the source code e.g.:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
process = Popen(["stdbuf", "-oL", "./main"], stdout=PIPE, bufsize=1)
for line in iter(process.stdout.readline, b''):
print line,
process.communicate() # close process' stream, wait for it to exit
There are also other utilities available, see Turn off buffering in pipe.
Or use pseudo-TTY
To trick the subprocess into thinking that it is running interactively, you could use pexpect module or its analogs, for code examples that use pexpect and pty modules, see Python subprocess readlines() hangs. Here's a variation on the pty example provided there (it should work on Linux):
#!/usr/bin/env python
import os
import pty
import sys
from select import select
from subprocess import Popen, STDOUT
master_fd, slave_fd = pty.openpty() # provide tty to enable line buffering
process = Popen("./main", stdin=slave_fd, stdout=slave_fd, stderr=STDOUT,
bufsize=0, close_fds=True)
timeout = .1 # ugly but otherwise `select` blocks on process' exit
# code is similar to _copy() from pty.py
with os.fdopen(master_fd, 'r+b', 0) as master:
input_fds = [master, sys.stdin]
while True:
fds = select(input_fds, [], [], timeout)[0]
if master in fds: # subprocess' output is ready
data = os.read(master_fd, 512) # <-- doesn't block, may return less
if not data: # EOF
input_fds.remove(master)
else:
os.write(sys.stdout.fileno(), data) # copy to our stdout
if sys.stdin in fds: # got user input
data = os.read(sys.stdin.fileno(), 512)
if not data:
input_fds.remove(sys.stdin)
else:
master.write(data) # copy it to subprocess' stdin
if not fds: # timeout in select()
if process.poll() is not None: # subprocess ended
# and no output is buffered <-- timeout + dead subprocess
assert not select([master], [], [], 0)[0] # race is possible
os.close(slave_fd) # subproces don't need it anymore
break
rc = process.wait()
print("subprocess exited with status %d" % rc)
Or use pty via pexpect
pexpect wraps pty handling into higher level interface:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import pexpect
child = pexpect.spawn("/.main")
for line in child:
print line,
child.close()
Q: Why not just use a pipe (popen())? explains why pseudo-TTY is useful.
while True. Once thefor-loop ended; you won't get anything fromprocess.stdoutanymore. – Skyla