On 4/20/24 4:50 PM, Bruno Haible wrote: > What I measure (with "GNULIB_TOOL_IMPL=sh time ./test-create-testdir-1.sh") > is: > dash 22 sec > bash 20 sec
dash 31 sec bash 28 sec Similar here. Looks like my desktop is just older than I remembered originally. > I think that 'dash' is generally somewhat faster than 'bash'. However, > gnulib-tool uses special bash syntax for appending to a list and for the > module caching; this probably makes it faster with 'bash' than with 'dash', Ah, I see. I remember seeing the associative arrays for module caching. I haven't spent much time using shells outside of bash so I don't know how common support for those extensions are. > What matters most, in the comparison shell vs. Python, IMO, is the string > processing [1]. Yes, I remember reading that email. Thank you for the detailed explanation. I guess that would also explain the Cygwin speed too? Since as far as I know Windows doesn't have fork() and deals with creating processes differently. I assume the Cygwin implementation is limited by that. Collin
