From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-users-return-19063-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 2107 invoked by alias); 11 Sep 2014 14:12:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Users List <zsh-users.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-users@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-users-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 19063
Received: (qmail 29795 invoked from network); 11 Sep 2014 14:12:35 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,
	SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-AuditID: cbfec7f5-b7f776d000003e54-42-5411ab73a239
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 15:02:26 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: zsh-users@zsh.org
Subject: Re: There is a serious inefficiency in the way zsh handles wildcards
Message-id: <20140911150226.215ec1db@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to:
 <CAHAq8pGY7SyXQfJPzty+th-8Dd1Y9tbWLUPubRMe8_CW+5m2Wg@mail.gmail.com>
References:
 <CAHAq8pF=hB4sfx+Fe6nfnbJ8W7E9r9e_mHytBdu=Oy_6CWukJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140908150135.6bbf5356@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <CAHAq8pGY7SyXQfJPzty+th-8Dd1Y9tbWLUPubRMe8_CW+5m2Wg@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
X-Brightmail-Tracker:
 H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupjluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42I5/e/4Fd3i1YIhBvdaBCx2nFzJ6MDoserg
	B6YAxigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujMOfnrEXfGapmHT0KHMD41fmLkZODgkBE4nHC89C2WISF+6t
	Z+ti5OIQEljKKLHr2AImKIdJ4vjOlWBVLAKqEkfvQdhsAoYSUzfNZgSxRQREJZav2MwOYgsL
	+EqsWbsBzOYVsJd4vOAXC4jNKRAsceTsT3aIoecZJb7Me8UEkuAX0Je4+vcTE8QZ9hIzr5xh
	hGgWlPgx+R5YM7OAusSkeYuYIWxtiSfvLrBOYBSYhaRsFpKyWUjKFjAyr2IUTS1NLihOSs81
	0itOzC0uzUvXS87P3cQICcOvOxiXHrM6xCjAwajEw/shVzBEiDWxrLgy9xCjBAezkgiv80Kg
	EG9KYmVValF+fFFpTmrxIUYmDk6pBkbrDR5aHwUFj7GtcUhYfNC/p/H6le1TZE7eac9b+1xf
	a5n39g2G956GLZw6p7d6/6QllUn6DIsvR0zU/XORNcS6IL3zLk+k7RXdW75Hkxc6Oq/uKDM9
	8TJ2Q4PTtwe/dRgmnjbo6tDkErlixb72y8nQRM2nb76cqU5uUV5745rLwjNVwjMlp1YosRRn
	JBpqMRcVJwIAtUipoCECAAA=

On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 10:54:23 -0300
Paulo C=C3=A9sar Pereira de Andrade
<paulo.cesar.pereira.de.andrade@gmail.com> wrote:
>   Just as a note, I noticed that the huge slowdown usually would
> only happen if there was a match, if there was nothing matching
> /tmp/*.* (usually a directory or a symlink to one) handling of the
> pattern would not cause noticeable delay.

I've a vague feeling I optimised it some time ago so that if there was a
string component to the pattern it searched for that to check it was
worth doing all the hairy pattern stuff, but I may be misremembering
and I'm too lazy to check...

pws