Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@sourceware.cygnus.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@sources.redhat.com From: Chris Faylor Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 22:12:59 -0400 To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: printf is faster when piped through tee Message-ID: <20000902221259.A13854@cygnus.com> Reply-To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com References: <000301c0151b$6f3023a0$f536ba8c@nhv> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.6i In-Reply-To: <000301c0151b$6f3023a0$f536ba8c@nhv>; from nhv@cape.com on Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:21:45PM -0400 On Sat, Sep 02, 2000 at 04:21:45PM -0400, Norman Vine wrote: >Jonas Jensen writes: >> >>> >Something's wrong with the performance of printf. When compiling with >>> >gcc, printf executes much slower than with Microsoft's "cl". The funny >>> >thing is that when I pipe those programs through "tee", they're both >>> >(equally) fast. >>> >> >>Did you do this on purpose or something? It seems a bit weird that a write >>takes _excactly_ 1/100th of a second, both on my GeForce-powered desktop >>comp. and my weak laptop... >> > >Hint - >you might want to perform your test using this terminal or something similar >http://www.io.com/~bub/rxvt.html >instead of the console device. No. This would use a completely different mechanism than console I/O. It would exercise cygwin ptys. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com