William Plusnick wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
>
> I wrote that comment simply because I thought that
> hard-coding "\n" might not always be desirable.
> Given that no one has ever complained, so
> simply removing the comment might be best.
>
> Agree
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Jim Meyering wrote:
> I wrote that comment simply because I thought that
> hard-coding "\n" might not always be desirable.
> Given that no one has ever complained, so
> simply removing the comment might be best.
>
> Agreed, I couldn't think of a use for it. I just
Pádraig Brady wrote:
> On 27/10/10 18:27, William Plusnick wrote:
>> I added a way to specify the string printed after the last number in the
>> seq command, as suggested by a comment. I am not sure how helpful this
>> option is, because I personally don't use the seq command much. I also
>> added
On 27/10/10 18:27, William Plusnick wrote:
> I added a way to specify the string printed after the last number in the
> seq command, as suggested by a comment. I am not sure how helpful this
> option is, because I personally don't use the seq command much. I also
> added documentation to both usage
