Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > gnu.bash.bug > #14492

Re: Unexpected delay in using arguments.

Path csiph.com!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!usenet.stanford.edu!not-for-mail
From Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com>
Newsgroups gnu.bash.bug
Subject Re: Unexpected delay in using arguments.
Date Wed, 15 Aug 2018 01:36:29 -0600
Lines 22
Approved bug-bash@gnu.org
Message-ID <mailman.5128.1534318599.1292.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink)
References <CAFra36j=UuqHv2Spp26ebAW0dRW+KsgNS21hZJrwuku9QUayWw@mail.gmail.com> <20180814123113518879862@bob.proulx.com> <CAFra36i8APbrP77S-v2wQgUp17bOprQtFqaYHHKqduRZuORVTA@mail.gmail.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host lists.gnu.org
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding quoted-printable
X-Trace usenet.stanford.edu 1534318599 29147 208.118.235.17 (15 Aug 2018 07:36:39 GMT)
X-Complaints-To action@cs.stanford.edu
Cc bug-bash <bug-bash@gnu.org>
To Bize Ma <binaryzebra@gmail.com>
Envelope-to bug-bash@gnu.org
Mail-Followup-To Bize Ma <binaryzebra@gmail.com>, bug-bash <bug-bash@gnu.org>
Content-Disposition inline
In-Reply-To <CAFra36i8APbrP77S-v2wQgUp17bOprQtFqaYHHKqduRZuORVTA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-detected-operating-system by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy]
X-Received-From 96.88.95.61
X-BeenThere bug-bash@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version 2.1.21
Precedence list
List-Id Bug reports for the GNU Bourne Again SHell <bug-bash.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-bash/>
List-Post <mailto:bug-bash@gnu.org>
List-Help <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-bash>, <mailto:bug-bash-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Xref csiph.com gnu.bash.bug:14492

Show key headers only | View raw


Bize Ma wrote:
> > but just the same it is almost always possible
> > to refactor a program into a different algorithm that avoids the need
> > to enumerate so many arguments in memory.
> 
> As you say: "almost".

I still believe that to be true.  Since you haven't shared what the
actual task is there is no way for us to propose any counter example
improvements.  So "almost" is as far as I can go.  Instead should I
say 99.44% of the time?  Since I have never come across a counter
example yet?

> Take a look at the Stéphane Chazelas example to convince yourself.

Nothing Stéphane said changed my statement at all.

It does look like bash can be more efficient with argument handling.
Since, for example, dash does it.

Bob

Back to gnu.bash.bug | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: Unexpected delay in using arguments. Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com> - 2018-08-15 01:36 -0600

csiph-web