[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#19842: sed bug: using -e instead of a literal newline in s replaceme
bug#19842: sed bug: using -e instead of a literal newline in s replacement fails
Tue, 17 Feb 2015 16:23:54 -0800
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Norihiro Tanaka <address@hidden> wrote:
> I interprete following as multiple `-e' option does not merge fragments
> of two commands.
> # If any -e or -f options are specified, the script of editing commands
> # shall initially be empty.
> i.e. the command by first -e option is parsed without the completion,
> the buffer is initialized into empty before next -e option.
Thanks for replying. I respectfully disagree with your interpretation.
The -e and -f options talk about "the script of editing commands" as
the entire script/program that will run once sed starts reading input.
Both -e and -f add commands to "the end of the script of editing
commands." The line you quoted uses the exact same phrase:
1) -e script
Add the editing commands specified by the script option-argument to
the end of the script of editing commands.
2) -f script_file
Add the editing commands in the file script_file to the end of the
script of editing commands.
3) If any -e or -f options are specified, the script of editing
commands shall initially be empty.
I posit that "the script of editing commands" means the same thing in
all three places. Therefore (3) means that the script/program that sed
will run is empty before the first -e or -f.
Your interpretation would cause "the script of editing commands" to
mean something different in (3) than it means in (1) and (2).