>> [...jot...] > The original code (see rev 1.1) seems to be more clear on how the > parameters should be evaluated.
Yes. Arguably the right thing to do here is to do the analog of what that version does and list all 16 possible combinations of START, REPS, ENDER, and STEP, with explicit code for each. But then, the jot NetBSD already has conforms precisely to its spec. Perhaps this could be viewed as a bug in the spec. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
