Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-27 Thread Bruno Haible
Eric Blake wrote: > I'm applying this as the obvious fix. > > 2006-09-25 Eric Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * gnulib-tool (func_import, func_create_testdir): Fix typos in > 2006-09-18 patch. Thanks. It was more than a typo, actually a thinko :-( Bruno

Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-25 Thread Eric Blake
Bruno Haible clisp.org> writes: > > > To be safe, I think you > > need to `exec <$file', or, restoring stdin, something like this: > > exec 5<&1 <$file > > while read r > > do > > $whatever > > done > > exec <&5 5<&- > > Astonishing. I never saw this kind of low-level shell progr

Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-19 Thread Bruno Haible
Eric Blake wrote: > This is to be expected - POSIX states that $$ is special, and that in a > subshell, it is not the pid of the current process, but the pid of the > original process. > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/xcu_chap02.html#tag_02_05_02 Thanks! I wasn't aware of

Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-19 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Bruno Haible wrote on Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 05:20:14PM CEST: > > > I think it may be possible to shave off another good part, but the next > > changes probably have a higher source code change to improvement ratio > > (caching func_lookup_file results could help; or rewriting func_get_* > > to wo

Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-19 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Bruno Haible on 9/18/2006 9:20 AM: >> I think it may be possible to shave off another good part, but the next >> changes probably have a higher source code change to improvement ratio >> (caching func_lookup_file results could help; or rew

Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-19 Thread Eric Blake
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 According to Bruno Haible on 9/18/2006 9:20 AM: > Ralf Wildenhues wrote: >> Hmm, ok. But traditional shells execute this construct >> while read foo >> do >> $whatever >> done <$file >> >> in a subshell, too, for example Solaris 10 sh. > >

Re: [bug-gnulib] Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-18 Thread Bruno Haible
Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hmm, ok. But traditional shells execute this construct > while read foo > do > $whatever > done <$file > > in a subshell, too, for example Solaris 10 sh. Ouch. Looking at the variables, it indeed behaves like a subshell. Looking at the process id, it does not..

Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-18 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Bruno, * Bruno Haible wrote on Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 02:50:40PM CEST: > I'm applying them all, with minor tweaks regarding the whitespace placement > (break lines before a binary operator, not after it) and double-quotes > (put double-quotes even where they are not strictly necessary, but wou

Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-18 Thread Bruno Haible
Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > PPS: should the number of files used by a project exceed a few hundred, > it may make sense to exploit bash3's `+=' with a func_append, in order > to avoid the quadratic scaling associated with string enlargement: Here's the patch I committed. 2006-09-17 Bruno Haible <[

Re: speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-18 Thread Bruno Haible
Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > For some invocations, gnulib-tool is rather slow[1], which impacts > productivity a bit. The following tries to improve things without > sacrificing portability, while hopefully it doesn't compromise > readability. ;-) Thanks a lot for the patches! They indeed boost perf

speed up gnulib-tool a bit

2006-09-15 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Bruno, all, For some invocations, gnulib-tool is rather slow[1], which impacts productivity a bit. The following tries to improve things without sacrificing portability, while hopefully it doesn't compromise readability. ;-) First, `sort -u' is already used in gnulib-tool, so it would see