On my long list of things to do is to have sort -g sort more
deterministically with NaNs. This could be done with the new totalorder
and totalorderl functions in C23 Annex F.10.12.1, if available. The fix
would not be portable (a these functions are newly sort-of-standardized
and are often not
On 9/28/23 04:22, Pádraig Brady wrote:
-n, --numeric-sort compare according to string numerical value.
leading blanks, negative sign, decimal
point,
and thousands separators are supported.
Although a valiant
On 28/09/2023 11:43, Jorge Stolfi wrote:
The full documentation of the "--general-numeric-sort" option of
{sort} says that NaN values are sorted "in a consistent but
machine-dependent order".
This is not good. The point of the IEEE floating-point standard was to
make the results of
The full documentation of sort explains that numeric sorting (as in
"sort -n") accepts a leading "-" sign, decimal points, thousands
separators, etc, but does not accept an explicit "+" sign. Values with
explicit "+" are treated as numeric 0 and ties are broken by alpha sort.
However, the
The full documentation of the "--general-numeric-sort" option of
{sort} says that NaN values are sorted "in a consistent but
machine-dependent order".
This is not good. The point of the IEEE floating-point standard was to
make the results of floating-point computations be independent of
On 28/09/2023 11:11, Jorge Stolfi wrote:
The full documentation of sort explains that numeric sorting (as in
"sort -n") accepts a leading "-" sign, decimal points, thousands
separators, etc, but does not accept an explicit "+" sign. Values with
explicit "+" are treated as numeric 0 and ties are
