Re: locales.

[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2006/12/22]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2006 at 08:58:52PM -0800, jrodman@xxxx.xxxxxxxxxx.xxx wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 05:43:21PM +1300, Guy Thornley wrote:
> > This is just wrong, on every single level I think of, this is WRONG.
[...]
> I can't tell if locales are insanely buggy or insane by design, or if
> the shell is insane.  Just digging into that code makes my head hurt so
> I have no real idea.

It seems it's mostly the shell that's insane.

locales provide a sort order, which indicates lexical sorting.
Certainly you'd find capital letter A and lower case letter A in the
same place in the dictionary.

Then bash developers decide that users of other languages should be able
to use range expressions that make sense in their dictionaries.  Okay
fine.

Then bash developers decide that they're going to change the meaning of
the existing glob expression [A-Z] from it's time honored behavior of
sorting in character numeric order (ascii) to lexical order.  They
couldn't have, you know, provided some way to express a lexical range
differently from a character range, or allowed the body of existing
scripts to work.

I'm sure they can quote some POSIX standard somewhere that well tell you
that you are wrong.  Oh wait they DO! "This is what POSIX.2 and
SUSv3/XPG6 specify."  Thanks idiot POSIX committees.

-josh

• Re: locales. jrodman 04:58 on 22 Dec 2006
  • Joshua Rodman 05:21 on 22 Dec 2006
    • Tony Finch 13:28 on 22 Dec 2006
  • A. Pagaltzis 06:08 on 22 Dec 2006
  • Rafael Garcia-Suarez 07:59 on 22 Dec 2006
  • Aaron Crane 10:39 on 22 Dec 2006
• Yossi Kreinin 12:34 on 22 Dec 2006

Generated at 20:02 on 28 Dec 2006 by mariachi 0.52