Alexey Knyazev wrote: > k...@fish-eye:~$ if (( 06 > 06 )); then echo lazhaa; fi > k...@fish-eye:~$ if (( 07 > 06 )); then echo lazhaa; fi > lazhaa > k...@fish-eye:~$ if (( 07 > 07 )); then echo lazhaa; fi > k...@fish-eye:~$ if (( 08 > 07 )); then echo lazhaa; fi > bash: ((: 08: value too great for base (error token is "08") > k...@fish-eye:~$ if (( 09 > 08 )); then echo lazhaa; fi > bash: ((: 09: value too great for base (error token is "09") > k...@fish-eye:~$
If you accept that the expressions in the non-standard construct ((FOO)) work the same as the ones in the standard construct $((FOO)), which seems reasonable, then this is perfectly correct behaviour. Arithmetic expressions recognize hexadecimal (starting with 0x), octal (starting with 0) or decimal (starting with 1-9) numbers. Another example: the following expression is true: (( 8 == 010 )) The numerical comparisons -lt, -le, -eq, -ne, -ge, -gt in test and [ recognize only decimal numbers. Therefore 09 is valid and nine and 010 is ten and not eight. I will admit that this is messy, but I think changing it now will only create a bigger mess. POSIX says where octal numbers shall and shall not be recognized and software generally complies to that. -- Jilles Tjoelker -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
