On 1/30/12 2:24 PM, DJ Mills wrote:
>> How is `INTEGER' any clearer? Integer constants can be specified as octal
>> or hex.
>
> Well, ok. The quoted section from the man page specifies a decimal.
How about `decimal whole number between 2 and 64'?
--
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to ler
DJ Mills wrote:
OK. �How about if that sentence began with `When specifying n, the
digits greater ...'?
declare -i foo; foo=20#a2; echo "$foo"
202
[base#]n, 'base' is a INTEGER 2-64, then '#', followed by the number.
---
Slightly more exact/pedantic, how about:
Syntax for integer cons
> How is `INTEGER' any clearer? Integer constants can be specified as octal
> or hex.
Well, ok. The quoted section from the man page specifies a decimal.
> > OK. How about if that sentence began with `When specifying n, the
> > digits greater ...'?
>
> declare -i foo; foo=20#a2; echo "$foo"
> 202
>
> [base#]n, 'base' is a INTEGER 2-64, then '#', followed by the number.
How is `INTEGER' any clearer? Integer constants can be specified as octal
or
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:02 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
>
>
> DJ Mills wrote:
>
>>> OK. �How about if that sentence began with `When specifying n, the
>>> digits greater ...'?
>>
>>
>> declare -i foo; foo=20#a2; echo "$foo"
>> 202
>>
>> [base#]n, 'base' is a INTEGER 2-64, then '#', followed by the num
DJ Mills wrote:
OK. �How about if that sentence began with `When specifying n, the
digits greater ...'?
declare -i foo; foo=20#a2; echo "$foo"
202
[base#]n, 'base' is a INTEGER 2-64, then '#', followed by the number.
^^^ That's much more clear!
> OK. How about if that sentence began with `When specifying n, the
> digits greater ...'?
declare -i foo; foo=20#a2; echo "$foo"
202
[base#]n, 'base' is a INTEGER 2-64, then '#', followed by the number.
On 1/28/12 9:45 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
> The part that says:
> digits greater than 9 are represented
> by the lowercase letters, the uppercase letters, @, and _, in that
> order.
OK. How about if that sentence began with `When specifying n, the
digits greater ...'?
--
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 06:45:34PM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote:
>Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Linda Walsh writes:
>>
>>
>>> var=0a32; echo $var
>>> -bash: 0a32: value too great for base (error token is "0a32")
>>>
>>
>> Which part of "Constants with a leading 0 are interpreted as octal
>> numbe
Linda Walsh writes:
> The part that says:
> digits greater than 9 are represented
> by the lowercase letters, the uppercase letters, @, and _, in
> that
> order.
>Again, What part of that do you not get?
Which part of "decimal number" did you not understand?
Andre
Andreas Schwab wrote:
Linda Walsh writes:
var=0a32; echo $var
-bash: 0a32: value too great for base (error token is "0a32")
Which part of "Constants with a leading 0 are interpreted as octal
numbers" did you not understand?
The part that said the ones that start with 0 and are fol
Linda Walsh writes:
> var=0a32; echo $var
> -bash: 0a32: value too great for base (error token is "0a32")
Which part of "Constants with a leading 0 are interpreted as octal
numbers" did you not understand?
> var=a#32; echo $var
> -bash: a#32: syntax error: invalid arithmetic operator (error tok
reading the section no constants:
Constants with a leading 0 are interpreted as octal numbers. A
leading
0x or 0X denotes hexadecimal. Otherwise, numbers take
the form
[base#]n, where base is a decimal number between 2 and 64
representing
the arithmetic base,
13 matches
Mail list logo
