Mail Archives: djgpp/2010/04/24/19:45:17
"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT gnu DOT org> wrote in message
news:83mxwt17tq DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org...
> From: "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have AT havenone DOT cmm>
> > "Rugxulo" <rugxulo AT gmail DOT com> wrote in message
news:4c64a5b1-bf8a-49e1-843e-9a0594856e82 AT c36g2000yqm DOT googlegroups DOT com...
> > >
> > > P.S. I love GNU sed, but in my experience it's pretty darn
> > > slow on big files.
> > >
> >
> > I've not used it. I have need of VI, occasionally. I prefer DOS EDIT,
> > but it and other DOS editors seem unable to do two things that
> > VI can do.
>
> VI and EDIT are unrelated to Sed.
So?
> Sed is a _stream_ editor, it edits
> files in batch mode, not interactively.
> It is suitable for scripts
> that need to edit text.
>
Which is much like, if not the same as, what I mentioned that I did [you
snipped] by generating AWK scripts from VI commands... Yes?
Except for command line issues, the Sed command the OP posted is the
same as the EX/ED commands in VI. He could do the same for them: generate
AWK scripts from Sed commands, manually or programmatically. Using AWK
could possibly provide an improvement in processing speed. I've seen AWK
and VI on every non-Windows machine I've ever used, including the
non-Unix/Linux ones where you wouldn't expect to seen them.
RP
- Raw text -