[9fans] awk bug

[9fans] awk bug

[erik quanstrom]

sorry i left out a part:

minooka; awk 'BEGIN {OFMT="%.0f"; print 17.23}'
17
minooka; /n/sources/plan9/386/bin/awk 'BEGIN {OFMT="%.0f"; print 17.23}'
17.23

- erik

Re: [9fans] awk bug

[boyd, rounin]

> This is a bug that was introduced when BWK switched from the lex scanner
> to a hand-written one.  (Guess who told him about it? :-)  It's fixed in
> the current version:

i understand that.  i'd prefer to mangle the test scripts than to hack awk.
my reasoning being is that the side effects of hacking the test script are
minimal, but hacking awk is fraught with peril (i knew that before i bio-fied
it).

the rand() based tests are pretty much useless.

the problem is to make the right choice :(

Re: [9fans] awk bug

[Aharon Robbins]

In article <d2f8e7b66b79d38d34ac299d879b7c03@sdgm.net> you write:
>brahma% echo a b c | awk 'BEGIN { f[0] = 2 }
>		{ print $f[0] }
>		'
>awk: syntax error at line 2
> context is
>		{ print >>>  $f[ <<<
>awk: illegal statement at line 2
>brahma% echo a b c | awk '{ print $2 }'
>b

This is a bug that was introduced when BWK switched from the lex scanner
to a hand-written one.  (Guess who told him about it? :-)  It's fixed in
the current version:

	$ echo a b c | nawk 'BEGIN { f[0] = 2}
	> { print $f[0] }'
	b
	$ nawk -V
	awk version 20030731

Arnold

Re: [9fans] awk bug

[boyd, rounin]

> (maybe `($f)[0]' is the right parse), ...

roger that.  fixed the test and the plan 9 awk passes it.

Re: [9fans] awk bug

[Geoff Collyer]

I'm not sure if `$f[0]' should work as you intend
(maybe `($f)[0]' is the right parse), but parentheses
can fix things to work as you intend:

; echo a b c | awk 'BEGIN { f[0] = 2 }
		{ print $(f[0]) }'
b

[9fans] awk bug

[boyd]

brahma% echo a b c | awk 'BEGIN { f[0] = 2 }
		{ print $f[0] }
		'
awk: syntax error at line 2
 context is
		{ print >>>  $f[ <<<
awk: illegal statement at line 2
brahma% echo a b c | awk '{ print $2 }'
b