On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 12:11:06PM +0100, Alex Zbyslaw wrote: > Yar Tikhiy wrote: > > >>Aren't sed's addresses required to be cumulative across its > >>input files? > >> > >>http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/sed.html > >> > >> > > > >That makes sense for filter mode because it's equvalent to > >concatenating the files in advance: > > > > cat files ... | sed expression > > > >OTOH, in-place mode selected by a -i option can be seen as follows: > > > > for f in files ...; do > > sed expression < $f > $f.tmp && mv $f $f.bak && mv $f.tmp $f > > done > > > >I.e., each file preserves its individuality. This can be at logical > >conflict with cumulative addresses across all files. > > > > > > > As a Joe Random sed user, I'd agree with Yar. The GNU behaviour makes > more sense in most practical examples I can think of. > > Perhaps a touch of feaping creaturism, but we could just add a -I flag > which behaved as -i does now, and make -i behave as GNU. I bet I > *could* construct examples where the current behaviour was what I desired.
Thank you for supporting me! I've just looked at the code and it seems to me that it should be rather easy to preserve the current semantics under a -I flag, too. They are too neat to throw them away. -- Yar _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
