[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

**To**:**"markucz%gmail.com@localhost" <markucz%gmail.com@localhost>****Subject**:**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)****From**:**Kristaps Dzonsons <kristaps%kth.se@localhost>**- Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:29:26 +0200

Does anyone know of any reason to maintain this silly behavior? (And does anyone want to bikeshed about whether 0 should generate 0: 0 or 0: or nothing at all but continue to the next number?)Well, if you can factor 1, why not 0 too? If 'factor 1' gives '1: 1', I guess 'factor 0' should be '0: 0'. At least it won't break piping to e.g. awk and will keep factor's behaviour consistent. If it continues to the next number you'll get one line less of output which might be confusing. It doesn't really matter, just flip a coin :)

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)***From:*Robert Elz

**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)***From:*markucz

**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)***From:*David Holland

**References**:**silly behavior of factor(6)***From:*David Holland

**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)***From:*markucz

- Prev by Date:
**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)** - Next by Date:
**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)** - Previous by Thread:
**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)** - Next by Thread:
**Re: silly behavior of factor(6)** - Indexes: