Re: more problems w/ irix

[Zefram <zefram@dcs.warwick.ac.uk>]

>> It's a nice syntax.  If it's grossly inefficient, we should improve the
>> code; being built in to the shell it *ought* to be more efficient than
>> execing cat, at least for small files.
>
>It doesn't exec a cat, it does the reading/writing itself (in closemn).

I'm aware of that.  I was responding to the statement that it is
inefficient, saying that "foo <a <b <c" should be more efficient than
"cat a b c | foo".  If it isn't, we should make it so.

>I'm not sure how we could make this more efficient without using something
>like mmap().

I think using mmap() would be a good move.  An madvise(), as used by
some cats, would also help performance.  We can do autoconf checks for
these functions, and would in any case need to have the code fall back
on a read/write loop in case mmap() is impossible.

-zefram