From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: quanstro@quanstro.net
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] fuse bashing
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20060124201041.5A72A78FBB@dexter-peak.quanstro.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 14:10:41 -0600
Topicbox-Message-UUID: e61c570e-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Mon Jan 23 20:21:36 CST 2006, lucho@gmx.net wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2006 at 12:06:09PM -0500, Russ Cox said:
> > It appears to match the kernel better, so the implementation
> > should be simpler.  (As soon as you want to talk between
> 
> It is much simpler (and probably faster), and that's a big win for FUSE:
> 
> 	$ cat fs/fuse/*.[ch] | wc -l
> 	4073
> 
> 	$ cat 9p/*.[ch] | wc -l
> 	7271

why do you assume that line count is porportinal to
speed of execution or complexity?