On 9/3/23 2:36 AM, Stephane Chazelas via austin-group-l at The Open Group
wrote:
And except with yash's printf (among the few printf's I've
tested):
$ LC_ALL=zh_TW luit
$ locale title charmap
Chinese locale for Taiwan R.O.C.
BIG5
$ echo() { printf '%b ' "$@"\\n\\c; }
$ echo 'α'
αn%
(the
On 9/3/23 4:22 PM, Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group wrote:
Date:Sun, 3 Sep 2023 07:36:59 +0100
From:Stephane Chazelas
Message-ID: <20230903063659.mzyfen4evyrnz...@chazelas.org>
| though has the same limitation as my bash echo -e "$*\n\c"
Yes,
Date:Sun, 3 Sep 2023 07:36:59 +0100
From:Stephane Chazelas
Message-ID: <20230903063659.mzyfen4evyrnz...@chazelas.org>
| though has the same limitation as my bash echo -e "$*\n\c"
Yes, I know, though as nothing anywhere says what echo is supposed
to do with a lone
2023-09-03 08:27:58 +0700, Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
[...]
> The SysIII echo (abomination) can be done using printf %b independant
> of IFS:
>
> echo() { printf '%b ' "$@"\\n\\c; }
>
> works.
Nice, though has the same limitation as my bash echo -e "$*\n\c"
$ echo()
Date:Fri, 1 Sep 2023 07:15:14 -0500
From:"Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group"
Message-ID:
| > That is dependant on the current value of $IFS. You'd need:
| >
| > xsi_echo() (
| > IFS=' '
| > printf '%b\n' "$*"
| > )
|
| So yes,
Stephane Chazelas wrote in
<20230902084912.vdfedsgbnat2w...@chazelas.org>:
|2023-09-01 23:28:50 +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The \
|Open Group:
...
|>|FWIW, a "printf %b" github shell code search returns ~ 29k
|>|entries
2023-09-01 23:28:50 +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso via austin-group-l at The Open
Group:
[...]
> |FWIW, a "printf %b" github shell code search returns ~ 29k
> |entries
> |(https://github.com/search?q=printf+%25b+language%3AShell=code=Sh\
> |ell)
> |
> |That likely returns only a small subset of
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
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
oup-l at The Open Group"
Cc: Phi Debian , chet.ra...@case.edu, Eric Blake
, bug-coreut...@gnu.org, bug-b...@gnu.org, Steffen Nurpmeso
Subject: Re: RFC: changing printf(1) behavior on %b
Message-ID: <20230901163434._byqv%stef...@sdaoden.eu>
Mail-Followup-To: "Oğuz via austin-group-l at T
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='
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
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 "$*"
> > }
>
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 10:12 AM Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> Yes, though note:
>
> - that implies forking a process and loading an external
> executable and its libraries
The standard doesn't mandate that printf be a builtin; so, in
principle, this might be the case with printf as well.
> - bc
2023-08-31 15:02:22 -0500, Eric Blake via austin-group-l at The Open Group:
[...]
> The current POSIX says that %b was added so that on a non-XSI
> system, you could do:
>
> my_echo() {
> printf %b\\n "$*"
> }
That is dependant on the current value of $IFS. You'd need:
xsi_echo() (
IFS=' '
2023-09-01 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
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
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?
2023-08-31 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 Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 03:10:58PM -0400, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 8/31/23 11:35 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> > 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
On 2023-08-31 08:35, Eric Blake wrote:
Typing-wise, %#s as a synonym for %b is
probably going to be easier (less shell escaping needed). Is there
any interest in a patch to coreutils or bash that would add such a
synonym, to make it easier to leave that functionality in place for
POSIX Issue 9
On 8/31/23 11:35 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
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 printf(3) (to produce 0b000... binary
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 printf(3) (to produce 0b000... binary literals).
For POSIX Issue 8, we plan to mark
23 matches
Mail list logo
