Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 20:38:15 +0000
From: Harald van Dijk <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
| On 15/01/2019 15:13, Joerg Schilling wrote:
| > would make it she slowest shell in the universe.
| parser as well. Testing on its own configure script, yes, there are
| faster shells, including yours, but it's still fast,
I fail to see why any real importance is given to shell speed.
On my system, where I use bash as my interactive shell, in more
than 56000 invocations (almost 57000), bash has yet to accumulate
1 cpu second, and bash does not have the reputation of being a fast shell....
For scripting I use the NetBSD sh (of course), that one, in more than
2.5 million actual invocations, is up to about 15.6 cpu seconds, and forked
subshells (close to 50 million) have used about 17 cpu minutes.
These are nothing compared with what this system has consumed over
the same period in total, even friendly little ps is up to about
30 hours of cpu time over the same period (50000 invocations approx).
Similarly, each of the compiler, browser, the assembler, flash video
player, cpu usage times dwarf all of the shells I ever use/test
on this system, added together, many times over -- the assembler,
not notoriously a cpu hog, in approaching 30000 invocations is up to
about 10 hours of cpu usage.
While unnecessarily wasting resources is never a good idea, these
"my shell is faster than yorus" wars are simply plain stupidity.
No-one (sane) cares.
kre
