Message-ID: <2ca21dcc0901021506g1ab459b3ya8df823ac9e4a7f2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 23:06:15 +0000
From: "Dave Korn" <dave.korn.cygwin@googlemail.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Inconsistency with sort -n?
In-Reply-To: <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A211B41DEC@NIHMLBX02.nih.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <0105D5C1E0353146B1B222348B0411A211B41DEC@NIHMLBX02.nih.gov>
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

Buchbinder, Barry (NIH/NIAID) [E] wrote:
> `sort -n' and `sort -g' work inconsistently with 0 and -0 if there are
> leading spaces.  Sometimes -0 is before 0, as I would expect, and sometimes
> it is afterwards.  Adding `-b' does not seem to help.
>
> Is this where I should report it or should I go upstream?

  Kinda depends where it's coming from. Could be newlib, could be cygwin,
could be sort itself. Either the + and - zeros aren't being correctly
converted to their float representations, or the comparison of + vs. - zero
isn't working right, at a first guess.

> In case you are wondering why I want to do this:  I'm counting items in a
> bin so the bin from -1 to 0 and 0 to +1 are different.

  Hacky work-around: " | sort -r | sort [-n|-g] -s". First alphabetic sort
using -r gets all the negative numbers at the start of the list, then adding
stable flag to the numeric sort preserves their relative ordering when they
compare equal.

> Happy Gregorian New Year!

  Happy Pastafarian Noodly YARRRR!

    cheers,
      DaveK

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/