On Oct 9, 2007, at 12:28 AM, Paul Eggert wrote:
Benoit SIGOURE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:The manual is not really clear but when I read this part, it means (to me) that traditional Awk is unusable and that one can write portable Awk without necessarily worrying about it working on these "traditional Awk".As a practical matter, if we stick to traditional Awk we are less likely to tickle bugs in all the weird Awk implementations that are out there. So if it's easy to use traditional Awk, it's probably better for us to stick to that subset. In this particular case I don't see a major win in switching to POSIX 'split' or user-defined functions so we might as well leave it alone.
OK so that means Ralph shouldn't use the 3-argument `split' (which is not a big deal anyway, you can change and restore `FS' to achieve this, right?).
-- Benoit Sigoure aka Tsuna EPITA Research and Development Laboratory
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
