Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Bob Friesenhahn on 4/9/2008 11:15 AM:
> | On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Josh Triplett wrote:
> |>
> |> I tested against 1.5.26. I'll give 2.2.2 a shot and see what I find.
> |> However, when I looked at 2.2.2, it still seems to have a
> |> multi-thousand-line shell script; do you just expect the benefit to
> |> come from the new shell-specific optimizations?
> |
> | Since shell scripts are not compiled, the size of a shell script has
> | very little to do with its execution time.
>
> On the other hand, recent improvements in autoconf 2.62 proved that we
> were able to speed up testsuite performance by more than 10% by merely
> refactoring Autotest output to avoid shell parsing of code that would not
> be executed. In other words, the time the shell spends on parsing its
> input, whether or not that input is executed, is not trivial.
>
Just for fun, lets compare shells at parsing useless code.
(using bash)
$ for y in {1..100}; do echo "func_notused${y} () {" >> parse.sh; for x
in {1..10000}; do echo foo >> parse.sh; done; echo '}' >> parse.sh;
done; echo 'echo Done' >> parse.sh
On linux:
$ time bash parse.sh
Done
real 0m4.567s
user 0m3.970s
sys 0m0.188s
$ time dash parse.sh
Done
real 0m1.421s
user 0m1.242s
sys 0m0.096s
$ time zsh parse.sh
Done
real 0m1.635s
user 0m1.293s
sys 0m0.161s
On mac os x:
$ time zsh parse.sh
Done
real 0m1.429s
user 0m1.176s
sys 0m0.193s
$ time bash parse.sh
Done
real 0m4.921s
user 0m4.706s
sys 0m0.215s
$ time ksh parse.sh
Done
real 5m31.311s *******
user 5m29.284s
sys 0m1.876s
I know that libtool has not yet reached a million+ lines of useless
shell functions though :)
Peter
--
Peter O'Gorman
http://pogma.com
_______________________________________________
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
