On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:12 AM Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> Yes, though note:
>
> - that implies forking a process and loading an external
> executable and its libraries
The standard doesn't mandate that printf be a builtin; so, in
principle, this might be the case with printf as well.
> - bc
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
2023-09-01 07:13:36 +0100, Stephane Chazelas via austin-group-l at The Open
Group:
> 2023-08-31 10:35:59 -0500, Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
> > In today's Austin Group call, we discussed the fact that printf(1) has
> > mandated behavior for %b (escape sequence processing
2023-08-31 15:02:22 -0500, Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
[...]
> The current POSIX says that %b was added so that on a non-XSI
> system, you could do:
>
> my_echo() {
> printf %b\\n "$*"
> }
That is dependant on the current value of $IFS. You'd need:
xsi_echo() (
IFS=' '
2023-08-31 10:35:59 -0500, Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
> In today's Austin Group call, we discussed the fact that printf(1) has
> mandated behavior for %b (escape sequence processing similar to XSI
> echo) that will eventually conflict with C2x's desire to introduce %b
> to
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 7:41 AM Phi Debian wrote:
> My vote is for posix_printf %B mapping to libc_printf %b
In the shell we already have bc for base conversion. Does POSIX really
have to support C2x %b in the first place?
2023-09-01 09:44:08 +0300, Oğuz via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 7:41 AM Phi Debian wrote:
> > My vote is for posix_printf %B mapping to libc_printf %b
>
> In the shell we already have bc for base conversion. Does POSIX really
> have to support C2x %b in the first
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 08:59:19AM +0100, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> 2023-08-31 15:02:22 -0500, Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
> [...]
> > The current POSIX says that %b was added so that on a non-XSI
> > system, you could do:
> >
> > my_echo() {
> > printf %b\\n "$*"
> > }
>
On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 07:19:13AM +0200, Phi Debian wrote:
> Well after reading yet another thread regarding libc_printf() I got to
> admit that even %B is crossed out, (Yet already choosen by ksh93)
>
> The other thread also speak about libc_printf() documentting %# as
> undefined for things
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
2023-09-01 07:15:14 -0500, Eric Blake:
[...]
> > Note that in bash, you need both
> >
> > shopt -s xpg_echo
> > set -o posix
> >
> > To get a XSI echo. Without the latter, options are still
> > recognised. You can get a XSI echo without those options with:
> >
> > xsi_echo() {
> > local IFS='
2023-09-01 07:54:02 -0500, Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
[...]
> > Well in all case %b can not change semantic in the bash script, since it is
> > there for so long, even if it depart from python, perl, libc, it is
> > unfortunate but that's the way it is, nobody want a semantic
Dropped that from my mail queue as i realized there are many
other receivers. (And saw Stephane writing much more to
bug-bash@.)
--- Forwarded from Steffen Nurpmeso ---
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2023 18:34:34 +0200
Author: Steffen Nurpmeso
From: Steffen Nurpmeso
To: "Oğuz via austin-group-l at The
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://www.austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
A NOTE has been added to this issue.
==
https://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1771
==
Reported By:calestyo
Assigned To:
Stephane Chazelas via austin-group-l at The Open Group wrote in
<20230901181024.pwx4plwclz7ij...@chazelas.org>:
|2023-09-01 07:54:02 -0500, Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
...
|> How many scripts in the wild actually use %b, though? And if there
|> are such scripts, anything
21 matches
Mail list logo
