Re: word(s) patch

[Petr M. <mi...@ph...>]

> I don't know either.  Perhaps I should just remove the substr()
> function altogether.  That would make a clear distinction between
> the operation  STRING[beg:end]  (uses C-language indexing from 0)
> and the function calls like word(STRING,N)  (uses rexx or fortran
> indexing starting from 1).
>
> But I agree that the substr(beg,end) indexing is confusing, and
> contradicts the awk equivalent  substr(beg,length) regardless
> of whether beg starts at 0 or 1.
>
> Petr: What are your thoughts?  It was your suggestion to include
> a subroutine form of the substring operator (and it was utterly
> trivial to implement).  But it may add more confusion than it is
> worth.

I propose the substr() be compatible to awk (i.e. indexing from 1 and with 
parameter giving length of the substring).

---
PM