Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #14456
| Path | csiph.com!goblin3!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> |
| Newsgroups | gnu.bash.bug |
| Subject | Re: Rational Range Interpretation for bash-5.0? |
| Date | Mon, 6 Aug 2018 15:12:51 -0600 |
| Lines | 12 |
| Approved | bug-bash@gnu.org |
| Message-ID | <mailman.4773.1533589978.1292.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink) |
| References | <1f2b7e3e-3dee-f5bb-7f0b-59393ae99902@case.edu> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | lists.gnu.org |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
| X-Trace | usenet.stanford.edu 1533589979 9085 208.118.235.17 (6 Aug 2018 21:12:59 GMT) |
| X-Complaints-To | action@cs.stanford.edu |
| To | bug-bash@gnu.org |
| Envelope-to | bug-bash@gnu.org |
| Mail-Followup-To | bug-bash@gnu.org |
| Content-Disposition | inline |
| In-Reply-To | <1f2b7e3e-3dee-f5bb-7f0b-59393ae99902@case.edu> |
| User-Agent | Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) |
| X-detected-operating-system | by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] |
| X-Received-From | 96.88.95.61 |
| X-BeenThere | bug-bash@gnu.org |
| X-Mailman-Version | 2.1.21 |
| Precedence | list |
| List-Id | Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell <bug-bash.gnu.org> |
| List-Unsubscribe | <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> |
| List-Archive | <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/> |
| List-Post | <mailto:bug-bash@gnu.org> |
| List-Help | <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=help> |
| List-Subscribe | <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe> |
| Xref | csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:14456 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Chet Ramey wrote: > Hi. I am considering making bash glob expansion implement rational range > interpretation starting with bash-5.0 -- basically making globasciiranges > the default. It looks like glibc is going to do this for version 2.28 (at > least for a-z, A-Z, and 0-9), and other GNU utilities have done it for some > time. What do folks think? I think the non-rational ranges in libc were a terrible idea that we have all been suffering with over the last decade plus. Bob
Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Rational Range Interpretation for bash-5.0? Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> - 2018-08-06 15:12 -0600
csiph-web