> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 12:00:52 +0100 (BST) > From: Corin Hartland-Swann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Why not just use "LC_ALL=C sort", if you want a C-locale sort? > > Because it would be documented in the man page Can't that be fixed by documenting "LC_ALL=C sort" better in the man page? Once that is done, the other advantages I mentioned for "LC_ALL=C sort" will apply. (Since you got confused by the current documentation, you get to suggest better wording. :-) > Also because it's easier to call from perl (because that's what I'm > doing) without changing LC_ALL for the whole process. You don't need to change LC_ALL for the whole process. You need to change it only for the child process that execs sort. That should be easy to arrange in Perl. > Just as an aside, do you need to set LC_ALL=C, or is it just the same > setting LC_COLLATE=C? It's not the same, but it's safer, because LC_COLLATE must be compatible with LC_CTYPE, and LC_ALL sets both. > And is C the same as POSIX in this context? Yes, on POSIX hosts. It's also the same on all non-POSIX hosts that I know about. However, in theory there could be some non-POSIX hosts where "C" works but "POSIX" does not. _______________________________________________ Bug-textutils mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-textutils
