Re: silly behavior of factor(6)

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 09:38:12PM +0200, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote:
 > According to the manual, 0 is invalid input (not posint), while 1 is
 > valid input (posint) that happens to have no prime factors.  Producing
 > "0:" is ignoring what the manual stipulates.  "1:" is correct behaviour.

Again, the manual was changed last night (it used to claim factor
accepted values from -2147483648 to 2147483647) so it can hardly be
taken as an authoritative reference.

Or if it can, I'll just change both it and the code to do what I think
is right and everyone else can suck it :-)

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost