Jim Meyering wrote:
I tried it, and found that this new function makes the multibyte-white-space
test fail with GNU sed.
Yes, and the more I look at it the less I like it. I'm afraid I'm now going
back to the idea that we should just use octal. This outputting-hex business is
more trouble t
Forwarding to the bug tracking system:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Jim Meyering
Date: Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: bug#18987: the bourne shell printf-vs-\xHH portability trap
To: Paul Eggert
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Sat, No
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> 2014-11-08 20:19 GMT-08:00 Jim Meyering :
>> On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>>> hex_printf_()
>>> {
>>> hex_printf_format=$(printf '%s\n' "$1" | sed '
>>> s/^/_/
>>> s/$/_/
...
>> Do you have time to wr
2014-11-08 20:19 GMT-08:00 Jim Meyering :
> On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> hex_printf_()
>> {
>> hex_printf_format=$(printf '%s\n' "$1" | sed '
>> s/^/_/
>> s/$/_/
>> s/\([^\\]\(\)*\\x\)\([0-9aAbBcCdDeEfF][^0-9aAbBcCdDeEfF]\)/\10\3/g
>> s/
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 17:54:03 -0800
Jim Meyering wrote:
> I pushed that, then tested more and found an error I'd introduced.
> Here's the fix:
Ah, I could not find it. Thanks.
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Paul Eggert wrote:
> hex_printf_()
> {
> hex_printf_format=$(printf '%s\n' "$1" | sed '
> s/^/_/
> s/$/_/
> s/\([^\\]\(\)*\\x\)\([0-9aAbBcCdDeEfF][^0-9aAbBcCdDeEfF]\)/\10\3/g
> s/\([^\\]\(\)*\\x\)\([0-3]\)/\10\3/g
> s/\(
I have some qualms about that patch. It assumes the C locale, and it's a bit
safer to spell it out as in '0-9abcdefABCDEF'. Also, the temporary streams
(i.e., the output of 'COMMAND inside '$(COMMAND)') are not text, and arguably
this does not conform to POSIX (POSIX is murky here) and anyway
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Norihiro Tanaka wrote:
>> On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 07:56:48 -0800
>> Jim Meyering wrote:
>>> Thank you for working on that.
>>> I've improved your patch: update the now-shared hex_printf_
>>> rather than making a cop
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Norihiro Tanaka wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 07:56:48 -0800
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Thank you for working on that.
>> I've improved your patch: update the now-shared hex_printf_
>> rather than making a copy, use a better definition of that function
>> (knowing that
On Sat, 8 Nov 2014 07:56:48 -0800
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Thank you for working on that.
> I've improved your patch: update the now-shared hex_printf_
> rather than making a copy, use a better definition of that function
> (knowing that "printf %s a b c d e" reuses the format string and
> prints jus
On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 11:46 AM, wrote:
> Norihiro Tanaka wrote:
>
>> Thanks, but it seem that it is also unportable. On Solaris 10 and AIX 7,
>> below. Need Gawk for tests?
>>
>> $ awk 'BEGIN { printf "\x41" }' > \x41
>
> If you use octal it should work with any awk.
Thanks, but octal would
Norihiro Tanaka wrote:
> Thanks, but it seem that it is also unportable. On Solaris 10 and AIX 7,
> below. Need Gawk for tests?
>
> $ awk 'BEGIN { printf "\x41" }' \x41
If you use octal it should work with any awk.
Arnold
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Norihiro Tanaka wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Thank you for testing and reporting that!
>> I have a marked preference for using hexadecimal (readability),
>> but if I can't find a good, universally-portable converter that is
>> sufficiently simple, I'll just rev
Jim Meyering wrote:
> Thank you for testing and reporting that!
> I have a marked preference for using hexadecimal (readability),
> but if I can't find a good, universally-portable converter that is
> sufficiently simple, I'll just revert to using octal.
Thanks, I fixed left multibyte-white-space
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Norihiro Tanaka wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>
>> I ran grep's tests on a debian system this morning and was
>> surprised to see the word-multibyte test fail...
>> Until I realized it was because that system was configured
>> to use dash for /bin/sh, and this test
On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Norihiro Tanaka wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>
>> I ran grep's tests on a debian system this morning and was
>> surprised to see the word-multibyte test fail...
>> Until I realized it was because that system was configured
>> to use dash for /bin/sh, and this test
Jim Meyering wrote:
> I ran grep's tests on a debian system this morning and was
> surprised to see the word-multibyte test fail...
> Until I realized it was because that system was configured
> to use dash for /bin/sh, and this test relied on the unportable
> printf '\xc3\xa1\n' to print an a (A
I've pushed these, and will make a new snapshot soon.
Holler if there's anything else you think should be included.
I ran grep's tests on a debian system this morning and was
surprised to see the word-multibyte test fail...
Until I realized it was because that system was configured
to use dash for /bin/sh, and this test relied on the unportable
printf '\xc3\xa1\n' to print an à (A-grave). Using \xHH
hexadecimal
19 matches
Mail list logo
