On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 2:09 PM enh <e...@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2024 at 7:35 PM Ray Gardner <rayg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Elliott, have you tried toybox awk yet? If not, why? Still using bwk's?
> i'm "not not" interested, but there hasn't been the demand for gawk > extensions that there is for, say, bash extensions. > ... > but when it's out of pending, i'll probably build it anyway. it'll > then at least be easy to flip the symlink to test. Here's where I'm confused. I thought your group was trying to use toybox as a general replacement where possible, but you're using onetrueawk. My awk doesn't have any gawk extensions or other features not already in onetrueawk and I'm not trying to go beyond posix awk except where everyone else does. (The bitwise operators excepted, and I'm fine with removing them to make it smaller, if anyone asks.) If you and everyone else waits for awk to get out of pending, I won't find out what its shortcomings are. And I may be dead by then, as lots of stuff has been in pending over 10 years, sh nearly 20. > off-topic, but did you try https://github.com/TheMozg/awk-raycaster ? :-) Interesting. Took a look. I can't use it in my awk because it uses gawk's arrays-of-arrays feature, which is supported by no other awk AFAIK. Also uses gawk's asort() function. I could implement asort() pretty easily, but arrays of arrays not so much. asort() would make my awk larger and we're hoping to make it smaller, but a similar effect can be implemented in plain awk. Ray _______________________________________________ Toybox mailing list Toybox@lists.landley.net http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
