[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Undocumented feature: Unnamed fifo '<(:)'
From: |
felix |
Subject: |
Re: Undocumented feature: Unnamed fifo '<(:)' |
Date: |
Fri, 9 Apr 2021 07:51:14 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) |
On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 01:23:09AM +0200, Léa Gris wrote:
> > You could have a look:
> > https://f-hauri.ch/vrac/mandelbrot_backgndBc.sh.txt
> > https://f-hauri.ch/vrac/mandelbrot_backgndBc_4macOs.sh.txt
> Have a look at my POSIX/shell version that is even slightly faster:
> https://gist.github.com/leagris/59e1b7e72462024b278652696f375e71
Faster if run under dash or busybox, not using bash!
But, why did you
exec 8<>"$bcin";exec 9<>"$bcout"
then don't use `echo >&8` nor `read <&9`?
As you are re-adressing FS at every read/write, your script is still
something slower! Test and compare my re-modified version of your (dropped
trap exit and addressing FSs, operate few seconds quicker).
https://f-hauri.ch/vrac/mandelbrot_posix.sh.txt
But there is less to do with [bash].
> There is no need for bash specific features, although coproc and other
> fancynesses can help, these lack portability.
Of course many bashisms could be avoided to stay POSIX portable.
In that way, commands like `coproc` are useless if not counter productive.
My meaning here was to improve coproc in order to by able to drive STDERR too.
--
Félix Hauri - <felix@f-hauri.ch> - http://www.f-hauri.ch