Subject: bug#23110: seq apparent bug

From: Pádraig Brady <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 17:47:39 +0100

The 2 patches look good.

On 14/04/16 17:37, Bernhard Voelker wrote:
>> >    seq 1 .0000000000000000000000000000001 1
> I consider this a bug in seq: from mathematical point of view, the above
> should just output "1" and then exit, because after adding that tiny number
> the next number would be greater than LAST.

right

> IMO we should enhance seq_fast() to do all the Math when no special
> output format is given.
> WDYT?

It would be good to expand seq_fast to more cases.

thanks!
Pádraig