Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 19:59:37 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Dan Papasian <bugg@bugg.strangled.net> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: which(1), rewritten in C? Message-ID: <20000302195937.F14279@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <20000302204719.A8563@moe.c705742-a.htfdw1.ct.home.com>; from bugg@bugg.strangled.net on Thu, Mar 02, 2000 at 08:47:19PM -0500 References: <20000302204719.A8563@moe.c705742-a.htfdw1.ct.home.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Dan Papasian <bugg@bugg.strangled.net> [000302 18:17] wrote: > While this may sound crazy, I was tired of 'which' taking a long > time to complete on my 486 dx4/100 when it was under extereme > pressure, so I rewrote it in C :) > ...snip > NOTE: > This version of which has exactly the same behavior. > Also, the above test was not performed when the box was > under load.. and on slower machines/under load, the > differences are of course, more noticable. > You may all go ahead and call me crazy now. > > ...I've got the fear of posting the source, but what the heck, > getting nitpicked is good education :) > > http://bugg.strangled.net/which.c > > Any flames^Wthoughts? It doesn't seem to handle multiple arguments. File a PR and fix the issues and I'll look at getting it into post 4.0. -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000302195937.F14279>