>> I imagine that there are more advanced possibilities to improve the software >> run time characteristics for this use case. > > Well, if it has to be fast, perhaps don't write the code in the shell > language.
To which “shell” would you like to refer to? > Even an interpreted scripting language that can do string handling without > resorting to fork()-based command substitution will beat the shell at many > tasks. How do you think about additional approaches to reduce the forking of special processes? >> I would like to avoid such an operation “Remove matching prefix pattern” >> generally. >> If the desired file lists contain only basenames, extra prefixes do not need >> to be deleted. > > I.e. we can use the basename function: > > for name in dir/*txt; do > basename "$name" > done > > prints the basenames of the matching files, one per line. There is also the GNU variant available for such a command. for X in $(basename --suffix=.txt dir/*txt); do my_work $X; done But how often can it be avoided to delete extra data like prefixes (and suffixes)? Can it occasionally be a bit more efficient to provide only the essential values at the beginning of an algorithm so that so they will be extended on demand? Regards, Markus
