Re: uniq: missing option -W (original) (raw)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N
From: | Jim Meyering |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N |
Date: | Tue, 27 Jun 2006 15:29:10 +0200 |
Pádraig Brady <address@hidden> wrote:
> Yes, that's still a problem. > Would you like to work on it?
Hmm looks like that's done already? http://www.openi18n.org/subgroups/utildev/dli18npatch2.html
$ cat Pádraig Pádraig PÁdraig
$ ./i18n-uniq -i < Pádraig Pádraig
It's not so simple. That patch duplicates large chunks of logic, bloating the resulting code and (more importantly) making it far less maintainable.
I'm holding out for a clean solution.
- Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, (continued)
* 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, 2006/06/27
* 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 <=
* Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N, Paul Eggert, 2006/06/27
- Prev by Date:Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N
- Next by Date:Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N
- Previous by thread:Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N
- Next by thread:Re: uniq: missing option -W / --check-fields=N
- Index(es):