On Sat, Jul 01, 2017 at 01:20:19PM +, kshe wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 09:29:10 +, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> >
> > at last a followup, for the original problem.
> >
> > This diff incorporates your later comment. It does not cause the newly
> > added regress test to fail, though.
> >
>
On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 09:29:10 +, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
>
> at last a followup, for the original problem.
>
> This diff incorporates your later comment. It does not cause the newly
> added regress test to fail, though.
>
> So that poses the question if this is what you meant.
>
>
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 09:01:15AM +0200, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
at last a followup, for the original problem.
This diff incorporates your later comment. It does not cause the newly
added regress test to fail, though.
So that poses the question if this is what you meant.
-Otto
Index:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:08:11AM +, kshe wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 10:25:27 +, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> > Thanks for the analysis and diff, I hope to get a chanche to think
> > about this soon. At least I'll make sure this diff is not forgotten,
> > -Otto
>
> I have seen the tests
On Sat, 10 Jun 2017 10:25:27 +, Otto Moerbeek wrote:
> Thanks for the analysis and diff, I hope to get a chanche to think
> about this soon. At least I'll make sure this diff is not forgotten,
> -Otto
I have seen the tests that you recently added to the tree; in the mean
time, however,
On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 07:58:48AM +, kshe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There is an ongoing confusion in sed's source about the concept of EOL:
> the code contradicts itself as to whether it should be determined by a
> trailing NUL or by looking up the `len' field of the SPACE structure.
>
> At least
Hi,
There is an ongoing confusion in sed's source about the concept of EOL:
the code contradicts itself as to whether it should be determined by a
trailing NUL or by looking up the `len' field of the SPACE structure.
At least two commands (`l' and `s') assume that the pattern space is
always
