|
From: | Matthew Woehlke |
Subject: | Re: What is the opposite of 'printf'? |
Date: | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 16:22:37 -0600 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061025 Thunderbird/1.5.0.8 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0 |
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
Paul Eggert wrote:Matthew Woehlke writes:Given the remainder of this thread, can one of the maintainers offer an opinion on whether or not 'unprintf' (also useful for programmers; again, see rest of the thread) would be a useful addition to coreutils, or perhaps some other existing GNU project?I dunno, it sounds fairly specialized. Why not just use a portable POSIX script instead?
Hmm... yes, probably (thanks for a reply, at least!), but it isn't quite as simple as writing a script. Yes, you can do it that way, but it isn't as simple/efficient as it seems at first glance. What I eventually wrote is intended to work 'well' with things that are mostly-but-not-entirely ASCII, i.e. it translates 'a' to 'a', and so forth, while translating non-printing characters into escapes while trying to emit the shortest possible sequences. You do realize that you can't translate '\0\x30' (a NUL followed by a printing zero digit) into '\00', right? ;-) 'Shortest sequence' requires looking ahead.
I should note that I'm still waiting for the someone to step up as miscutils maintainer, address@hidden never got back to me about it.
Hmm... don't think I have time for package maintainership (plus I am terrible with autotools :-)). Too bad. Does anyone else have time? Pleeeease?
Seriously, depending on how complicated it is, I might be able to help out, I'm just not willing to commit to being the primary/only maintainer. :-)
-- Matthew What? This signature /again/?
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |