Ed Morton wrote:
>
> On 3/15/2008 6:08 AM, Hermann Peifer wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The Gawk man page says:
>> > Starting with version 3.1.5, as a non-standard extension,
>> > with an array argument, length() returns the number
>> > of elements in the array.
>>
>> It looks like Gawk's length(array) extension does not work inside
>> functions. Is this a bug or feature or am I missing something? See the
>> example below. I am using GNU Awk 3.1.6
>>
>> $ cat testdata
>> CD NAME
>> AT Austria
>> BG Bulgaria
>> CH Switzerland
>> DE Germany
>> EE Estonia
>> FR France
>> GR Greece
>>
>> $ cat test.awk
>>
>> # Populate array
>> NR > 1 { array[$1] = $2 }
>>
>> # Print array length and call function A
>> END { print "array:",length(array) ; A(array) }
>>
>> function A(array_A) { print "array_A:", length(array_A) }
>>
>> $ gawk -f test.awk testdata
>> array: 7
>> gawk: test.awk:8: (FILENAME=data FNR=8) fatal: attempt to use array
>> `array_A (from array)' in a scalar context
>>
>> BTW, there is no such error if I have asort(array_A) or asorti(array_A)
>> inside the function.
>>
>> Hermann
>
> I get the same result with gawk 3.1.6 for cygwin. Obviously you can work
around
> it since asort() returns the number of elements in an array just like
length()
> is supposed to (or "for (i in array) lgth++" if you don't want to be
> gawk-specific) but it does seem like a bug. Anyone know if there's a
list of
> known gawk bugs on-line somewhere?
>
> Ed.
>
Thanks for confirming. I wouldn't know of any online Gawk bug list. If
such a thing existed, it would probably mentioned somewhere at:
http://www.gnu.org/software/gawk/
or http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gawk
The Gawk man page says:
> BUG REPORTS
> If you find a bug in gawk, please send electronic mail to
bug-gawk@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
