1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
|
# @(#)POSIX 8.1 (Berkeley) 6/6/93
Comments on the IEEE P1003.2 Draft 12
Part 2: Shell and Utilities
Section 4.55: sed - Stream editor
Diomidis Spinellis <dds@doc.ic.ac.uk>
Keith Bostic <bostic@cs.berkeley.edu>
In the following paragraphs, "wrong" usually means "inconsistent with
historic practice", as most of the following comments refer to
undocumented inconsistencies between the historical versions of sed and
the POSIX 1003.2 standard. All the comments are notes taken while
implementing a POSIX-compatible version of sed, and should not be
interpreted as official opinions or criticism towards the POSIX committee.
All uses of "POSIX" refer to section 4.55, Draft 12 of POSIX 1003.2.
1. 32V and BSD derived implementations of sed strip the text
arguments of the a, c and i commands of their initial blanks,
i.e.
#!/bin/sed -f
a\
foo\
\ indent\
bar
produces:
foo
indent
bar
POSIX does not specify this behavior as the System V versions of
sed do not do this stripping. The argument against stripping is
that it is difficult to write sed scripts that have leading blanks
if they are stripped. The argument for stripping is that it is
difficult to write readable sed scripts unless indentation is allowed
and ignored, and leading whitespace is obtainable by entering a
backslash in front of it. This implementation follows the BSD
historic practice.
2. Historical versions of sed required that the w flag be the last
flag to an s command as it takes an additional argument. This
is obvious, but not specified in POSIX.
3. Historical versions of sed required that whitespace follow a w
flag to an s command. This is not specified in POSIX. This
implementation permits whitespace but does not require it.
4. Historical versions of sed permitted any number of whitespace
characters to follow the w command. This is not specified in
POSIX. This implementation permits whitespace but does not
require it.
5. The rule for the l command differs from historic practice. Table
2-15 includes the various ANSI C escape sequences, including \\
for backslash. Some historical versions of sed displayed two
digit octal numbers, too, not three as specified by POSIX. POSIX
is a cleanup, and is followed by this implementation.
6. The POSIX specification for ! does not specify that for a single
command the command must not contain an address specification
whereas the command list can contain address specifications. The
specification for ! implies that "3!/hello/p" works, and it never
has, historically. Note,
3!{
/hello/p
}
does work.
7. POSIX does not specify what happens with consecutive ! commands
(e.g. /foo/!!!p). Historic implementations allow any number of
!'s without changing the behaviour. (It seems logical that each
one might reverse the behaviour.) This implementation follows
historic practice.
8. Historic versions of sed permitted commands to be separated
by semi-colons, e.g. 'sed -ne '1p;2p;3q' printed the first
three lines of a file. This is not specified by POSIX.
Note, the ; command separator is not allowed for the commands
a, c, i, w, r, :, b, t, # and at the end of a w flag in the s
command. This implementation follows historic practice and
implements the ; separator.
9. Historic versions of sed terminated the script if EOF was reached
during the execution of the 'n' command, i.e.:
sed -e '
n
i\
hello
' </dev/null
did not produce any output. POSIX does not specify this behavior.
This implementation follows historic practice.
10. Deleted.
11. Historical implementations do not output the change text of a c
command in the case of an address range whose first line number
is greater than the second (e.g. 3,1). POSIX requires that the
text be output. Since the historic behavior doesn't seem to have
any particular purpose, this implementation follows the POSIX
behavior.
12. POSIX does not specify whether address ranges are checked and
reset if a command is not executed due to a jump. The following
program will behave in different ways depending on whether the
'c' command is triggered at the third line, i.e. will the text
be output even though line 3 of the input will never logically
encounter that command.
2,4b
1,3c\
text
Historic implementations, and this implementation, do not output
the text in the above example. The general rule, therefore,
is that a range whose second address is never matched extends to
the end of the input.
13. Historical implementations allow an output suppressing #n at the
beginning of -e arguments as well as in a script file. POSIX
does not specify this. This implementation follows historical
practice.
14. POSIX does not explicitly specify how sed behaves if no script is
specified. Since the sed Synopsis permits this form of the command,
and the language in the Description section states that the input
is output, it seems reasonable that it behave like the cat(1)
command. Historic sed implementations behave differently for "ls |
sed", where they produce no output, and "ls | sed -e#", where they
behave like cat. This implementation behaves like cat in both cases.
15. The POSIX requirement to open all w files at the beginning makes
sed behave nonintuitively when the w commands are preceded by
addresses or are within conditional blocks. This implementation
follows historic practice and POSIX, by default, and provides the
-a option which opens the files only when they are needed.
16. POSIX does not specify how escape sequences other than \n and \D
(where D is the delimiter character) are to be treated. This is
reasonable, however, it also doesn't state that the backslash is
to be discarded from the output regardless. A strict reading of
POSIX would be that "echo xyz | sed s/./\a" would display "\ayz".
As historic sed implementations always discarded the backslash,
this implementation does as well.
17. POSIX specifies that an address can be "empty". This implies
that constructs like ",d" or "1,d" and ",5d" are allowed. This
is not true for historic implementations or this implementation
of sed.
18. The b t and : commands are documented in POSIX to ignore leading
white space, but no mention is made of trailing white space.
Historic implementations of sed assigned different locations to
the labels "x" and "x ". This is not useful, and leads to subtle
programming errors, but it is historic practice and changing it
could theoretically break working scripts. This implementation
follows historic practice.
19. Although POSIX specifies that reading from files that do not exist
from within the script must not terminate the script, it does not
specify what happens if a write command fails. Historic practice
is to fail immediately if the file cannot be opened or written.
This implementation follows historic practice.
20. Historic practice is that the \n construct can be used for either
string1 or string2 of the y command. This is not specified by
POSIX. This implementation follows historic practice.
21. Deleted.
22. Historic implementations of sed ignore the RE delimiter characters
within character classes. This is not specified in POSIX. This
implementation follows historic practice.
23. Historic implementations handle empty RE's in a special way: the
empty RE is interpreted as if it were the last RE encountered,
whether in an address or elsewhere. POSIX does not document this
behavior. For example the command:
sed -e /abc/s//XXX/
substitutes XXX for the pattern abc. The semantics of "the last
RE" can be defined in two different ways:
1. The last RE encountered when compiling (lexical/static scope).
2. The last RE encountered while running (dynamic scope).
While many historical implementations fail on programs depending
on scope differences, the SunOS version exhibited dynamic scope
behaviour. This implementation does dynamic scoping, as this seems
the most useful and in order to remain consistent with historical
practice.
|
