[ozenyunus35]

Fixes #15578

-i should have no effect when -d is also given (GNU manual: "This option has no effect if the stronger --dictionary-order (-d) option is also given"). The key-option parser already does this for -k1,1di. The global options copied both flags into GlobalSettings, so sort -d -i used both filters and dropped the tabs and other control characters that -d keeps.

uumain now sets ignore_non_printing only when -d is not given. The incompatible-options check still uses both flags. Its messages were already the same as GNU's, e.g. options '-dn' are incompatible for -n -d -i.

export LC_ALL=C
printf '\tK\n7\n' | sort -d -i | od -An -c
# before:  7  \n  \t   K  \n
# after:  \t   K  \n   7  \n    (same as GNU 9.12)

I added test_dictionary_order_overrides_non_printing, which checks -d -i, -i -d, -di, -id and -di -k1. It fails without the change, and all test_sort tests and the uu_sort unit tests pass. I also compared -d -i, -i -d, -di, -id, -d -i -k1,1, -di -k2, -dir, -dif, -d and -i with GNU 9.12 on input with tabs and control characters. The output was the same for all of them.

cargo bench -p uu_sort shows no change against the merge base beyond run-to-run noise.

I used an AI assistant to help draft parts of the code and tests; I reviewed the changes and ran the tests myself.

[codspeed]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

1 warning, 1 note

⚠️ 29 benchmarks are dominated by system calls

System calls cannot be simulated consistently and are left out of the measure. The reported value understates the real cost. Switch to the Walltime instrument to measure them.

Learn more about system calls

See affected benchmarks

ℹ️ 1 benchmark has no flamegraph

The flamegraph wasn't generated: most of the time was spent in runtime internals, which would leave nothing useful to analyze.

See affected benchmarks

✅ 58 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 414 skipped benchmarks¹

---

_{Comparing ozenyunus35:sort-d-overrides-i (c39edcc) with main (ff0c589)²}

Footnotes

1. 414 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

2. No successful run was found on main (24f90f5) during the generation of this report, so ff0c589 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩