Re: [Help-bash] make function local

[Greg Wooledge]

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 03:04:00PM -0500, Peng Yu wrote:
> Hi Chet,
> > I disagree that performance overhead in typical use is `significant'.
> > This point is more or less identical to the one I discussed Friday in
> > regards to creating huge numbers of variables.  Who creates 100,000
> > shell functions in a single script?  The overhead, such as it is, of
> > creating and calling even 10,000 functions is negligible.
> 
> Why do you assume that one only calls each of these functions once?
> What if a function is called thousands of time?

The point is, the performance is *perfectly acceptable* if your script
only defines 10,000 functions instead of 100,000 functions.  You are
arguing to make a performance tuning adjustment for a situation that
will never arise in real life.

> The performance difference is 10x different (0.490s vs 0.040s). To me,
> this is a huge performance problem.

It would be a "huge performance problem" (maybe) if your script actually
declared 100,000 functions.

Do you have any scripts that declare 100,000 functions?

> The main point that Linda and I are making is that we suggest add the
> local function feature. I believe that we've made the case --- it
> makes the code cleaner and run faster.

What makes you think adding function namespaces (or whatever means of
localization) would make things run FASTER instead of slower?