Re: bin/59803: sed(1) conditional branch command confuses subsequent line addressing

["Valery Ushakov via gnats" <gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR bin/59803; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Valery Ushakov <uwe%stderr.spb.ru@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: bin/59803: sed(1) conditional branch command confuses subsequent
 line addressing
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 04:12:37 +0300

 On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 00:15:01 +0000, RVP via gnats wrote:
 
 >  but, there's a major difference between these two: even in a
 >  stream, sed can _always_ retrieve the current line number (even
 >  with `sed -i '' file.txt').  Whereas of course, when the pattern is
 >  gone, it's gone and you can't determine the applicable range.  So,
 >  with line numbers, you can act on the rest of the range.
 
 But why would you want to make them behave differently?!  It goes _so_
 against the POLA...  Also see the awk example.  In awk the two tests
 in the toggle pattern are just expressions, line numbers are not
 special in any way (they are just tests on NR).  Breaking the sed/awk
 symmetry seems like a bad idea.
 
 -uwe