Hi,
you are right.
PFA a patch for unit tests i added that can maybe go in when fold moves from
pending??,
the main intention is to discuss what i was unable to communicate(limitation on
my part), i added a comment too
so if anyone can cross check , that would be helpful
________________________________
From: Samuel Holland <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2018 10:28 PM
To: haroon maqsood; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Toybox] [PENDING] [fold.c] [Question]
Hi,
On 08/27/18 03:09, haroon maqsood wrote:
> Hi Rob,
> I started working on fold.c cleanup,
> going through the code, and testing it out, i have a couple of questions.
>
> 1. gnu fold engulfs \n unconditionally i.e if there is a \n after the fold
> has
> happened that redundant \n does not make it to the output , that kind of
> makes sense but the posix spec only mentions carriage returns and only if
> the -b option is not specified. (Note* That the current pending/fold
> outputs
> an extra new line.)
If a line is exactly the length that a newline would need to go after the last
character, no additional newline should be added. If there is, that's a bug. If
you're referring to a different situation, please give an example.
> 2. the current fold implementation has unfold capability , that i think
> should
> not be squeezed in fold (as of yet), my plan is to have unfold as a
> separate
> utility that uses infrastructure from fold if necessary, or at least make
> unfold as a config option, please share your thoughts on this.
> 3. The tabstop thing is bit confusing for me, as the posix spec says "Tab
> stops
> shall be at each column position such that n modulo 8 equals 1." ( from
> this i understand that given the column the next column where the tab ends
> should be a column whose modulo 8 returns 1 , kind of this pseudo code ?
> where start is the current column. (am i understanding it right ?)
>
> int get_next_ts(int start)
> {
> if (start <= 1)
> return 9;
>
> if ((start % 8) == 1)
> return start;
>
> return get_next_ts(++start);
> }
Yes, this is correct. A more idiomatic algorithm would be:
int get_next_ts(int start)
{
return ((start + 8) & -8) + 1;
}
> Haroon
Samuel
From 2ab1caccda196e6c956a3578341f1903e728485d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 23:20:22 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] added fold test for discussion
---
tests/fold.test | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tests/fold.test b/tests/fold.test
index e5fd37b..ab3353d 100755
--- a/tests/fold.test
+++ b/tests/fold.test
@@ -11,5 +11,5 @@ testing "fold_test_2" "fold -w4 -s" "abcd\nef \nd\n" "" "abcdef d\n"
testing "fold_test_3" "fold -w4 -s" "a \ncd \nfgh\n" "" "a cd fgh\n"
testing "fold_test_4" "fold -w4 -s" "abc \nef\n" "" "abc ef\n"
-#the question is posted
+#the question i posted
testing "fold_test_5" "fold -w1" "a\nb\nc\nd\n" "" "abcd"
--
2.17.1
_______________________________________________
Toybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
