From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21357 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2001 15:59:11 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 6 Mar 2001 15:59:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 27020 invoked by alias); 6 Mar 2001 15:59:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 13579 Received: (qmail 27008 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2001 15:59:01 -0000 To: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk Subject: Re: PATCH: Re: 4.0.1-pre-1 References: <200103061257.NAA02830@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Alexandre Duret-Lutz X-Home-Page: http://www.epita.fr/~duret_g/ X-Attribution: adl Organization: LRDE/EPITA http://www.lrde.epita.fr/ Date: 06 Mar 2001 17:07:22 +0100 In-Reply-To: <200103061257.NAA02830@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: Alexandre Duret-Lutz >>> "Sven" == Sven Wischnowsky writes: [...] Sven> Yes, lots ;-) As always :) [...] Sven> The patch makes that testsuite work, roughly consuming as much memory Sven> as bash on this machine here (both sh and ksh use less memory, sigh). Here zsh now consumes less memory that bash, and the testsuite is really usable, that's great! However it is still significantly slower: % time bash testsuite > /dev/null bash testsuite > /dev/null 0.88s user 0.44s system 101% cpu 1.302 total % time zsh testsuite > /dev/null zsh testsuite > /dev/null 7.13s user 0.27s system 100% cpu 7.357 total (this is a testsuite that exists before the first test, as I explained.) I don't really care myself, 7s doesn't sound too much for such a big script, but maybe you'll have another great idea... This testsuite seems like a good benchmark for the parsing code. [...] Thanks! -- Alexandre Duret-Lutz