On Tuesday 09 March 2010 03:50, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 08 March 2010 20:56:07 Denys Vlasenko wrote: > > On Tuesday 09 March 2010 01:55, Harald Becker wrote: > > > Hallo Rob! > > > > > > > Why do we have unnecessary leading whitespace? What happend to small > > > > and simple and doing no more than absolutely necessary? > > > > > > As far as I remember the original (K&R) behavior of wc was always to > > > produce leading whitespace (fixed format output). Only the newer > > > versions of gnu wc striped of this leading whitespace. That lead to > > > several shell script failures that had to be fixed during the last years. > > > > ... and now we have script failures because _new_ scripts expect _new_ > > output format >>:( "Progress" sometimes looks like pointless churn. > > it depends on the options i think. normal `wc` still outputs leading spaces, > but `wc -c` never does. coreutils-5.94 and coreutils-8.4 behave the same ... > -mike
I distinctly remember old times when even 'wc -c <file' was spewing out leading spaces. Gosh... I am old enough now to talk about "old times" :) -- vda _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
