On 1/30/11 3:50 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hello, > > * Dan McGee wrote on Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 01:04:17AM CET: >> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Chet Ramey <chet.ra...@case.edu> wrote: >>> On 1/25/11 10:08 PM, Peter O'Gorman wrote: >>>> for lt_wr_arg >>>> do >>>> case \$lt_wr_arg in >>>> --lt-*) ;; >>>> *) set x "$@" "$lt_wr_arg"; shift;; >>>> esac >>>> shift >>>> done > >>> This is a terribly inefficient function. > > Only if bash implements it inefficiently. It doesn't have to scale > nonlinearly with an efficient shell implementation that special-cases > this idiom which is, by the way, used quite a bit in Posix shell > scripts.
If it's as common as you claim, it might be worth special-casing. The question is whether that's the case, and whether it's invoked with thousands of arguments enough to make the extra bookkeeping worthwhile. Chet -- ``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU c...@case.edu http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/