"integer" and specifying a base

"integer" and specifying a base

[Bart Schaefer]

Why doesn't "integer" accept the "-i N" option of "typeset"?  And if there's
a good reason why not, shouldn't the doc say that "integer" is equivalent to
"typeset -i10" and not "typeset -i"?

While I'm on the subject ...

integer [ {+|-}lrtux ] [ NAME[=VALUE] ... ]
     Equivalent to `typeset -i', except that options irrelevant to
     integers are not permitted.

Eh?  What relevance to integers do -l (lowercase) and -u (uppercase) have?
Surely those should be -L (left justify) and -R (right justify)?

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Re: "integer" and specifying a base

[Bart Schaefer]

On Jun 27, 10:24am, Bart Schaefer wrote:
} Subject: "integer" and specifying a base
}
} What relevance to integers do -l (lowercase) and -u (uppercase) have?
} Surely those should be -L (left justify) and -R (right justify)?
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  |  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                     This would have to be  |  I mean -Z, for zero-padded
                     -LZ, of course.        |  right justify.


-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com