On 12/26/18 10:49 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> Although [[ -z ${1+s} ]] and (($#)) works for testing if $1 is set,
> neither of them are uniformly better performance wise. In this case,
> should [[ -v 1 ]] be supported?
So you're saying that neither of the existing options performs better
than the other
On 12/26/18 4:31 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to compile hashlib.c to try its main(). But I got the
> following error. What is the correct commands to compile it? Thanks.
Think about the error message:
> "_xmalloc", referenced from:
> _hash_create in hashlib.o
> _hash_copy
On 12/25/18 11:28 AM, Peng Yu wrote:
> If I add a command after the builtin sleep, then the EXIT trap will be
> triggered upon typing ctrl-C.
>
> If the last command is removed, then the EXIT trap will not be
> triggered upon typing ctrl-C.
It's a bug in bash-4.4, fixed in bash-5.0.
--
``The l
Simple variables convert to array variables dynamically, but that doesn't
mean they should be interpreted exactly as if they are. I see that more of
just a convenient feature.
On Mon, Dec 24, 2018, 1:02 AM Bize Ma Chet Ramey () wrote:
>
> > >
> > > While this works:
> > >
> > > var=(hello); echo
On 12/26/18 2:56 PM, Eduardo A. Bustamante López wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 12:40:09PM -0600, Peng Yu wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I can not mkdir -p . in /tmp/ via the loadable mkdir. What is the
>> difference between /tmp/ and other directories? I am on Mac OS X. Is
>> this a bug in mkdir?
The diff
Op 27-12-18 om 19:22 schreef Chet Ramey:
On 12/26/18 10:49 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
Although [[ -z ${1+s} ]] and (($#)) works for testing if $1 is set,
neither of them are uniformly better performance wise. In this case,
should [[ -v 1 ]] be supported?
So you're saying that neither of the existing
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 3:19 PM Martijn Dekker wrote:
>
> Op 27-12-18 om 19:22 schreef Chet Ramey:
> > On 12/26/18 10:49 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> >
> >> Although [[ -z ${1+s} ]] and (($#)) works for testing if $1 is set,
> >> neither of them are uniformly better performance wise. In this case,
> >> s
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 4:50 PM Peng Yu wrote:
(...)
> What I meant in my original email is that I want something for testing
> if there is a command line argument (one or more, the exact number
> does not matter). $# gives more than that info, because it tells not
> only whether is any command li
Op 28-12-18 om 01:39 schreef Peng Yu:
What I meant in my original email is that I want something for testing
if there is a command line argument (one or more, the exact number
does not matter). $# gives more than that info, because it tells not
only whether is any command line argument, but also
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 12:27 PM Chet Ramey wrote:
>
> On 12/26/18 4:31 PM, Peng Yu wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd like to compile hashlib.c to try its main(). But I got the
> > following error. What is the correct commands to compile it? Thanks.
>
> Think about the error message:
>
> > "_xmalloc",
At 2018-12-27T18:39:26-0600, Peng Yu wrote:
> What I meant in my original email is that I want something for testing
> if there is a command line argument (one or more, the exact number
> does not matter). $# gives more than that info, because it tells not
> only whether is any command line argumen
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 5:15 PM Peng Yu wrote:
(...)
> Since the main() function is already there, why there is not already
> an easy way to compile it? How do you do unit-testing then for the
> code?
This is very easy to figure out from the source code, right :)?
(Hint: there is no "unit" testi
> I don't believe that at all. The number of positional parameters is kept
> anyway. It's not recalculated when you compare it to another number, so
> it's just as fast as a simple comparison of two integers.
Getting the number $# is slow.
> And even if it weren't -- if performance is *that* impo
At 2018-12-27T19:24:22-0600, Peng Yu wrote:
> > I don't believe that at all. The number of positional parameters is kept
> > anyway. It's not recalculated when you compare it to another number, so
> > it's just as fast as a simple comparison of two integers.
>
> Getting the number $# is slow.
By
At 2018-12-27T17:34:49-0800, Eduardo Bustamante wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 5:15 PM Peng Yu wrote:
> (...)
> > Since the main() function is already there, why there is not already
> > an easy way to compile it? How do you do unit-testing then for the
> > code?
>
> This is very easy to figure
At 2018-12-27T19:47:08-0600, Peng Yu wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 7:37 PM G. Branden Robinson
> > As others have noted, if you are worried about marginal performance
> > impacts this small, margin you are probably writing in the wrong
> > language, or distracting yourself with tiny details when
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 5:38 PM Peng Yu wrote:
>
> > I don't believe that at all. The number of positional parameters is kept
> > anyway. It's not recalculated when you compare it to another number, so
> > it's just as fast as a simple comparison of two integers.
>
> Getting the number $# is slow.
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 7:37 PM G. Branden Robinson
wrote:
>
> At 2018-12-27T18:39:26-0600, Peng Yu wrote:
> > What I meant in my original email is that I want something for testing
> > if there is a command line argument (one or more, the exact number
> > does not matter). $# gives more than that
We are talking about unit testing in the bash C source code, not bash scripts.
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 8:03 PM G. Branden Robinson
wrote:
>
> At 2018-12-27T17:34:49-0800, Eduardo Bustamante wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 5:15 PM Peng Yu wrote:
> > (...)
> > > Since the main() function is alr
> You're whacking moles. Use a profiler. That's what they're for.
I've already shown that $() is a major problem to slow down the speed
and I have reduced using its usage in my code and significantly
improved the performance. Nevertheless, it doesn't mean that it is not
necessary to systematical
On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 9:45 PM Peng Yu wrote:
(...)
> Yes and no. For a particular bash script, you can quantify which bash
> features are the most time-consuming.
(...)
> (...) But you can not profile all the
> bash scripts that have ever been written. Since there are only limited
> features in
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 4:28 AM Peng Yu wrote:
> We are talking about unit testing in the bash C source code, not bash
> scripts.
>
While toying with the loadable builtins I came up with this:
https://github.com/pgas/newt_builtin/blob/master/make.libbash
you need to set BASH_PATH so that it p
22 matches
Mail list logo
