On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 17:56, Mario DeFazio wrote: > > I guess old habits die hard, but I still wonder why it is that 15 (or is > it 20?) years after > David Korn added native integer arithmetic and the math expression (( )) > to ksh, > folks still use -eq, -ge, -gt and so on inside [[ ]] or worse, [ ] . > You have the integer variables defined with let, why not use them as > integers > and avoid the unnecessary num-to-string-to-num conversions, the extra > $var derefs, > and improve the readability? OK, readability may be subjective, but we > all remember > our basic algebraic expressions, right? :-) > Guilty as charged; I'm allergic to anything that looks like csh, and yes, some old habits die extremely hard. However in the context of the performance question presented (nice to tie it back on-thread), I think we're looking at a storm in a teacup.
> Regarding post-fix/pre-fix operations, I am a stalwart fan of the KISS > principle, > So? I was only questioning the runtime environment I tested it on (ie biological neurones) since I didn't actually run it on silicon. Glen's reply about wait proves that I completely missed something obvious due to a lack of hot mineral testing. I can't see your point otherwise. > Therefore I gently submit these syntax changes for your code above: > > while (( n > 0 )) ; do > wait > (( n-- )) > ... Given Glen's point about wait, this tail loop simplifies to a simple wait, and the main loop needs to be smarter; with or without integer variables! > At least it's nice to see that many people have stopped using [ ] in > favor of [[ ]] :-) > I still feel thoroughly modern for achieving that; perhaps it's time to join the 21st century and (( embrace this )) too. Cheers _______________________________________________ ast-users mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users
