Re: Unexpected delay in using arguments.

From	Bize Ma <binaryzebra@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	gnu.bash.bug
Subject	Re: Unexpected delay in using arguments.
Date	2018-08-15 12:11 -0400
Message-ID	<mailman.5146.1534349515.1292.bug-bash@gnu.org> (permalink)
References	<CAFra36j=UuqHv2Spp26ebAW0dRW+KsgNS21hZJrwuku9QUayWw@mail.gmail.com> <20180814123113518879862@bob.proulx.com> <CAFra36i8APbrP77S-v2wQgUp17bOprQtFqaYHHKqduRZuORVTA@mail.gmail.com> <20180815011219279040096@bob.proulx.com>

Show all headers | View raw

2018-08-15 3:36 GMT-04:00 Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com>:

> Bize Ma wrote:
>


> I still believe that to be true.


You are entitled to have an opinion, even if incorrect.


> 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?
>

Give it time.


> > Take a look at the Stéphane Chazelas example to convince yourself.
>
> Nothing Stéphane said changed my statement at all.
>

How do you process a «list of files» without the «list of files» ?


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

That is true.

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

Thread

Re: Unexpected delay in using arguments. Bize Ma <binaryzebra@gmail.com> - 2018-08-15 12:11 -0400

csiph-web