I had assumed that was what you were intending. It's what I would recommend, if asked.
--Don Ellis On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Mike B. <[email protected]> wrote: > I asked because I was leery of running untested code. I am > considering testing it in a VirtualBox Ubuntu setting, though. > > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Don Ellis <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks, Robert -- That is what I was trying to say. > > --Don Ellis > > > > On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Robert Citek <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Don Ellis <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > I guess the question is, how much effort is it to run the objective > test > >> > to > >> > show how much it helps. > >> > >> If it isn't worth the time to create and run the test, then it isn't > >> worth the time to write the code. In the simplest case all you need > >> is a stop watch and some event to time. > >> > >> > Down side is, one would need to also run the test on the 200-line > patch > >> > in > >> > the same installation, and collect figures to show how they compare. > >> > >> You wouldn't need to, but it would be nice. For completeness you'll > >> have three comparisons: baseline to bash code, baseline to 200-lines > >> of C, and bash code to 200-lines of C. > >> > >> Regards, > >> - Robert > -- Central West End Linux Users Group (via Google Groups) Main page: http://www.cwelug.org To post: [email protected] To subscribe: [email protected] To unsubscribe: [email protected] More options: http://groups.google.com/group/cwelug
