Subject: Re: bug#23110: seq apparent bug

From: Bernhard Voelker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 19:19:30 +0200

On 04/14/2016 06:47 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote:
> The 2 patches look good.

thanks for the review, pushed.

> 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.

I'll try to come up with something (which may take some time).

Have a nice day,
Berny