Talk:Brace expansion: Difference between revisions
→Duplicate supression
(→Duplicate supression: bash seems to agree) |
|||
Line 82:
::::::::::: Well the second bullet point of the spec includes an example which showcases duplicate alternatives. But I additionally added the phrase "''(which need not be unique)''" now to that paragraph, to make it more explicit. --[[User:Smls|Smls]] ([[User talk:Smls|talk]]) 23:12, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
::::::::::: I tried the perl implementation against this spec
:::::::::::: It would be incorrect if it did so, since f and k come from different alternatives, separated by the comma before the i. Alternatives separated by comma are expanded internally and exclusively from each other—one never takes a cross product over a comma, only over braces. --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] ([[User talk:TimToady|talk]]) 02:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Line 106:
:::::::::::: Which is exactly what the Perl solution prints. --[[User:Smls|Smls]] ([[User talk:Smls|talk]]) 02:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
::::::::::: Another datapoint: if you ignore the missing backslashes, bash output is identical to perl's and python's: abcqr abd,efqr abd,eghqr abi,jknqr abi,jl,mnqr abo,pqr. --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] ([[User talk:TimToady|talk]]) 02:13, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::::: Point taken. Thanks for the clarification. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 03:12, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
| |||