Re: [9fans] ports from GPL

[erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>]

the gnu awk folks are doing a pretty good job, given their constraints.

i have not read the sed code (for a while, anyway), but i could imagine
that it may have the same character set problems as newer versions of gnu grep.
gnu grep calls mbtowc for each input character, even when not required.

have you tried your test with LC_LANG=C?

- erik

"David Leimbach" <leimy2k@gmail.com> writes

|
| On 3/17/06, geoff@collyer.net <geoff@collyer.net> wrote:
| > > however gnu has devolved.  they seem to value compiling on anything,
| > > and efficiency, but they don't seem to value simplicity.
| >
| > It's a skewed form of concern about efficiency though.  In the case of
| > gcc, they worry about run-time of the generated program, but not about
| > the time it takes to compile it.  gcc seems to get slower with each
| > release.  I don't know if gcc 4 is the slowest C compiler on the
| > planet (I suspect that Henry Spencer's never-finished aacc, written in
| > awk, might take that title), but it's the slowest one I've used.
| >
| >
| As an aside, I was finding that later versions of GNU Awk were
| outrunning GNU Sed (Well I assume it was GNU sed.)  The authors of the
| Sed and Awk O'Reilly book saw the same behavior, which was a reversal
| of what they saw in the first edition of the book :-).
|
| I wonder who spent so much time speeding up awk and ignoring sed? :)