On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 12:55:39PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > On 2018/06/24 13:51, Klemens Nanni wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 12:42:54PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > Like realpath, this is another of those things where I think if it makes > > > sense to have on OpenBSD at all, base is a better place for it .. > > We have jot(1) in base; different synopsis but more versatile already. > > > > $ jot -s' ' 10 1 10 1 > > 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > > > > We do, and we also have a number of slightly annoying patches to ports > to use this instead of seq. > > (Also like realpath, it's something that could be reasonably be handled > as a __progname switch in jot ..)
At g2k16 naddy suggested that this might be possible and I spent a couple of days looking into this. Unfortunately, it's not as easy as it might seem at first sight. They share the same craziness of using doubles internally, but that's about the only thing they actually share. The format strings are mostly incompatible due to allowing different subsets of specifiers and due to seq(1) additionally having backslash escapes. This means that the hairiest piece of cods needs to be kept separate and the remaining overlap is so small that it makes more sense to have two separate programs.
