Hi again, I would like to mention that the committed patch for the trivial bugs that I reported is not even complete: there are still two problematic instructions literally one line above the one that did get fixed correctly (and I actually find this mildly amusing, especially considering the last paragraph of my first message).
On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 16:09:36 +0000, Martijn van Duren wrote: > Also the reasonable way is debatable because it's behaviour > actually changes on the BRE side if you use n as a separator and gsed > has an identical quirk on the replacement side: Ah, so now you notice that there are even more incompatibilities between this version and GNU sed where POSIX leaves the behaviour undefined; would you also want to transform these cases into hard errors, then? Please go right ahead, at least I am sure millert@ would like it. > Patch to do so below. Not asking for OKs (yet), since compile_re is used > in more places and whipped up in about a minute. I understand that you may be busy with many other things at once, but rushing out absurd diffs like this one or committing half-baked patches on top of less than half-baked patches is not a very efficient approach. I am happy to wait until you find enough time for a proper evaluation of the issue at stake; this is not a race. Regards, kshe
