docs/cut
changeset 38:ec76f8926598
clarify a statement
Thanks to Francesc for the suggestion.
author | markus schnalke <meillo@marmaro.de> |
---|---|
date | Tue, 06 Oct 2015 10:43:26 +0200 |
parents | c338b706447b |
children | e294684cf338 |
files | cut.en.ms |
diffstat | 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) [+] |
line diff
1.1 --- a/cut.en.ms Mon Oct 05 06:48:17 2015 +0200 1.2 +++ b/cut.en.ms Tue Oct 06 10:43:26 2015 +0200 1.3 @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ 1.4 selection specification is irrelevant; it doesn't even matter if 1.5 fields occur multiple times. Thus, the invocation 1.6 \f(CWcut -c 5-8,1,4-6\fP outputs the characters number 1.7 -1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 in exactly this order. The 1.8 +1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 in ascending order. The 1.9 selection specification resembles mathematical set theory: Each 1.10 specified field is part of the solution set. The fields in the 1.11 solution set are always in the same order as in the input. To