[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: tests

From: Assaf Gordon
Subject: Re: tests
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 00:26:39 -0400


> On Jun 6, 2016, at 01:34, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 10:25 PM, Jim Meyering <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Assaf Gordon <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Attached improved 3 tests (where '\c\\' is tested).
> Regarding the 2nd patch, "tests: test \dNNN \oNNN \xNN escape
> sequences", do any of those tests evoke different behavior from
> other-vendor sed commands (assuming they support the feature)?
> However, neither this question nor the one about \c in the other patch
> should hold up your pushing of these new tests.
> They are nicely stand-alone and do one job: improve test coverage.
> Thank you for the fine, single-tenet patches.
> You're welcome to push them.

Thank you for the review.

+ b206f21f58eb96c91552e81858f53e4c62389d33 tests: test less-common compilation 
+ 417b6d59e5bfa0c65ae6ccedc03feafb9dc620cf tests: test \dNNN \oNNN \xNN escape 
+ 891057bbbada625371ca890e1de3073493252fea tests: test text normalization (\X 

Regarding "\c" bad behavior: I'll write a patch to amend this soon.

Regarding other implementations:
I've tested several other implementations (busybox, heirloom, 
net/free/open-BSD, and even gnu-sed-3.02) - none of them support \dNNN \oNNN 
\xNN syntax. That is, the command:
  echo a | sed 's/a/\x41/'
On all SEDs except gnu-sed-4.* (which returns 'A').

 - assaf

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]