Public bug reported:
Heavy use of += notably impacts script performance. Consider the
following micro-benchmark (pattered after real script content):
i=0 s=
while ((i < 30000)); do
((++i))
s+=$i
done
which creates 138,894 character long string. On my system (macOS
10.14.6, 3.5 GHz i7), this takes ~8 seconds in mksh, compared with
ksh's ~0.1s and bash 5's ~0.3s. Here're `real' timing figures from
my most recent run (these figures are quite stable):
- mksh r57: 0m8.17s
- ksh 93u+ 2012-08-01: 0m0.10s
- bash 5.0.11(1)-release: 0m0.30s
It's no surprise that ksh93 is much faster, given its heavy
optimisation. Striking, though, is the poor performance of mksh
relative to the latest bash.
** Affects: mksh
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Tags: performance
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of mksh
Mailing List, which is subscribed to mksh.
Matching subscriptions: mkshlist-to-mksh-bugmail
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1855167
Title:
Comparatively poor += performance
Status in mksh:
New
Bug description:
Heavy use of += notably impacts script performance. Consider the
following micro-benchmark (pattered after real script content):
i=0 s=
while ((i < 30000)); do
((++i))
s+=$i
done
which creates 138,894 character long string. On my system (macOS
10.14.6, 3.5 GHz i7), this takes ~8 seconds in mksh, compared with
ksh's ~0.1s and bash 5's ~0.3s. Here're `real' timing figures from
my most recent run (these figures are quite stable):
- mksh r57: 0m8.17s
- ksh 93u+ 2012-08-01: 0m0.10s
- bash 5.0.11(1)-release: 0m0.30s
It's no surprise that ksh93 is much faster, given its heavy
optimisation. Striking, though, is the poor performance of mksh
relative to the latest bash.
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/mksh/+bug/1855167/+subscriptions
