Re: [PATCH 0/348] move AC_LIBOBJ invocations to the module descriptions

Bruno Haible wrote: > I wrote: >> Please review and comment. I'll wait for objections for a week. > > The week is over. I have now pushed the series of patches, after doing an > additional test with --create-megatestdir. Thanks. > Jim Meyering wrote: >> This new policy looks particularly easy to

Re: Dealing with character ranges in grep

Jim Meyering wrote: > Bruno Haible wrote: >> Paolo, >> >>> > [=e=] to match "e" as well as accented versions like é, è and ê). >>> > That is the one feature that you get with glibc, and that you would >>> > sacrifice when building --with-included-regex. >>> >>> I agree.  It's up to distros to choo

Re: [PATCH 0/348] move AC_LIBOBJ invocations to the module descriptions

I wrote: > Please review and comment. I'll wait for objections for a week. The week is over. I have now pushed the series of patches, after doing an additional test with --create-megatestdir. Jim Meyering wrote: > This new policy looks particularly easy to violate accidentally. > What do you thin

Re: Strftime: negative years

On 06/15/2011 02:44 PM, Steven Abner wrote: > Hi, > First sorry to bother, second thank you for providing source code worthy of > a good > shake down, third, arghhh, using negative years I found the return value to > be off. > > Using "%V/%u/%010G", which was the flag and field we matched, > a

Re: [PATCH] vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare

Hi Jim, We discussed -Wsign-compare on 2008-12-09, without a real conclusion. . > I'm using -Wsign-compare in iwhd, and this is the sole warning But when I build all of gnulib (excluding libunistring and git-merge-changelog) wit

Re: Dealing with character ranges in grep

On 06/15/2011 12:36 PM, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 06/15/11 10:00, Aharon Robbins wrote: >> Can I get a clear "yes, grep and sed are going to change to Reasonable >> Range Interpretation"? > > I can't speak for grep and sed since I'm not a maintainer of > either, but to my mind the only thing that ma

Strftime: negative years

Hi, First sorry to bother, second thank you for providing source code worthy of a good shake down, third, arghhh, using negative years I found the return value to be off. Using "%V/%u/%010G", which was the flag and field we matched, and creating a struct of Jan 1 dates, the return value differ

Re: Dealing with character ranges in grep

Bruno Haible wrote: > Paolo, > >> > [=e=] to match "e" as well as accented versions like é, è and ê). >> > That is the one feature that you get with glibc, and that you would >> > sacrifice when building --with-included-regex. >> >> I agree.  It's up to distros to choose, of course. > > If you are

Re: Dealing with character ranges in grep

On 06/15/11 10:00, Aharon Robbins wrote: > Can I get a clear "yes, grep and sed are going to change to Reasonable > Range Interpretation"? I can't speak for grep and sed since I'm not a maintainer of either, but to my mind the only thing that makes sense is for regular expressions like [a-z] to ha

Re: [PATCH] vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare

Jim Meyering wrote: > Paul Eggert wrote: >> On 06/15/11 08:17, Jim Meyering wrote: >> >>> + vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare >>> + * lib/vasnprintf.c (VASNPRINTF): Cast a known-positive quantity to >>> + size_t in order to avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare. >> >> Giv

Re: Dealing with character ranges in grep

Hi All. Can I get a clear "yes, grep and sed are going to change to Reasonable Range Interpretation"? I was looking into the code, in terms of not using RE_RANGES_IGNORE_LOCALES but simply always doing it based on character set ordering. Doing so lets up throw away hard_locale.[ch] also. Befor

Re: [PATCH] vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare

Paul Eggert wrote: > On 06/15/11 08:17, Jim Meyering wrote: > >> +vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare >> +* lib/vasnprintf.c (VASNPRINTF): Cast a known-positive quantity to >> +size_t in order to avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare. > > Given that the context is this

Re: [PATCH] vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare

On 06/15/11 08:17, Jim Meyering wrote: > + vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare > + * lib/vasnprintf.c (VASNPRINTF): Cast a known-positive quantity to > + size_t in order to avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare. Given that the context is this: if

[PATCH] vasnprintf: avoid a warning from gcc -Wsign-compare

Hi Bruno, I'm using -Wsign-compare in iwhd, and this is the sole warning on F15 using gcc-4.7.x built from yesterday's upstream sources. vasnprintf.c: In function 'vasnprintf': vasnprintf.c:5093:35: error: comparison between signed and unsigned\ integer expressions [-Werror=sign-com