Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com X-Originating-IP: [212.54.79.25] From: "Jonas Jensen" To: "Cygwin List" Subject: printf is faster when piped through tee Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2000 16:11:08 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Sep 2000 14:11:25.0210 (UTC) FILETIME=[ADCA6FA0:01C014E7] 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. This is my test program: ------------------------------------------------ #include #include void main(int argc, char** argv) { register int i; if (argc != 2) return 1; i = atoi(argv[1]); while (i--) printf("%i bottles of beer on the wall...\n", i); } ------------------------------------------------ Here are the scores of 1000 loops through this program, in seconds, measured with the "time" keyword in bash. cl: 0.561 gcc: 10.055 gcc/tee: 0.861 cl/tee 0.861 It appears that there's a way to print faster, because "cat" has no problem, while "ls" and others suffer badly from it. Can anyone explain/fix this? I'm using Win2k, Cygwin 1.1.4. -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com