Subject: Re: bug#19842: sed bug: using -e instead of a literal newline in s replacement fails

From: Assaf Gordon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 02:37:16 +0000

reopen 19842
tags 19842 +moreinfo
thanks

Hello Evan,

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 09:06:21AM -0800, Evan Gates wrote:
>I do not have a patch, but if you are interested I can ask on the
>Austin group list and see if there is any consensus and if so whether
>they would change the wording of the standard.

So let's re-open this for now, especially if you're going to raise this 
issue further on the Austin group. When you do, please send a note with 
the URL so we can keep track as well.

The behavior already differs between implementations, so it'll be 
intersting to see what's decided.

I assume that a discussion about this will cover all commands,
e.g. this as well:

  $ echo xyz | sed -e 'y/xyz/1\n3/'
  1
  3

versus:

  $ echo xyz | sed -e 'y/xyz/1\' -e '3/'
  sed: -e expression #1, char 8: unterminated `y' command

thanks,
 - assaf