[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N
From: |
Pádraig Brady |
Subject: |
Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N |
Date: |
Tue, 27 Jun 2006 10:22:51 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.8 (X11/20060502) |
Jim Meyering wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
>
> I'm glad you're willing to work on this.
> It's an often-requested feature.
> Unfortunately, the Debian -W patch was not acceptable.
> It did not allow the same flexibility that sort does in
> selecting keys. To provide that, GNU uniq will eventually
> accept at least the following options, just as sort does:
>
> -k, --key=POS1[,POS2] start a key at POS1, end it at POS2 (origin 1)
> -t, --field-separator=SEP use SEP instead of non-blank to blank transition
> -z, --zero-terminated end lines with 0 byte, not newline
>
> and even most, if not all, of these (for flexibility/interoperability
> with sort, as well as to ease code sharing between uniq and sort):
>
> -b, --ignore-leading-blanks ignore leading blanks
> -d, --dictionary-order consider only blanks and alphanumeric characters
> -i, --ignore-nonprinting consider only printable characters
agreed
> -f, --ignore-case fold lower case to upper case characters
It has this already. See below.
> -g, --general-numeric-sort compare according to general numerical value
> -M, --month-sort compare (unknown) < `JAN' < ... < `DEC'
> -n, --numeric-sort compare according to string numerical value
> -r, --reverse reverse the result of comparisons
These 4 deal with specific order which I don't think uniq should worry about?
uniq can be efficient and assume LANG=C always as
it need only care if adjacent items match or not.
Assuming LANG=C may be an issue for --ignore-case though?
However I notice v5.2.1 at least only seems to handle ascii:
$ LANG=ga_IE.utf8 uniq -i < Pádraig
Pádraig
PÁdraig
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, (continued)
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Pádraig Brady, 2006/06/22
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Eric Blake, 2006/06/21
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Matt Keenan, 2006/06/22
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Paul Eggert, 2006/06/22
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Matt Keenan, 2006/06/23
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Pádraig Brady, 2006/06/26
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Paul Eggert, 2006/06/26
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Jim Meyering, 2006/06/26
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Matt Keenan, 2006/06/26
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Jim Meyering, 2006/06/27
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N,
Pádraig Brady <=
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Jim Meyering, 2006/06/27
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Pádraig Brady, 2006/06/27
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Jim Meyering, 2006/06/27
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Paul Eggert, 2006/06/27