Re: seq: if FIRST is smaller than LAST

[Jim Meyering]

Karl Eichwalder <address@hidden> wrote:
> Reading the --help text of 'seq' (5.1.3 from alpha) I'm inclined to
> assume
>
>     seq 3 1
>
> and
>
>     seq 3 -1 1
>
> should result in the same output:
>
>     3
>     2
>     1
>
> But 'seq 3 1' does not produce any output.  The --help text:
>
>     INCREMENT is usually negative if FIRST is greater than LAST.
>
> Maybe, current behavior is covered by the meaning of "usually" (I'm not
> a native speaker, you know).

That is intended to convey that `a useful value specified as an
INCREMENT is usually negative if FIRST is greater than LAST'.

The case of an omitted INCREMENT is covered by this part:

    If FIRST or INCREMENT is omitted, it defaults to 1.  That is, an
    omitted INCREMENT defaults to 1 even when LAST is smaller than FIRST.

> You may also nuke this surious space at the end of the line:
...
> -omitted INCREMENT defaults to 1 even when LAST is smaller than FIRST.\n \
> +omitted INCREMENT defaults to 1 even when LAST is smaller than FIRST.\n\

Thanks.
That was fixed in CVS a few months ago.