X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,SPF_NEUTRAL,URI_BLOGSPOT X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Message-ID: <4E0A299D.5040504@cs.utoronto.ca> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 15:21:01 -0400 From: Ryan Johnson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Programming Anti-patterns in Shell and Perl Scripts References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On 28/06/2011 2:53 PM, Sravan Bhamidipati wrote: > Hello Cygwin. :-) > > I have been working on static code analysis from a performance > perspective, and I recently applied the concept to Shell and Perl > scripts. The most basic idea was to look for usages of Unix commands, > their combinations with pipes, and stuff like that to which > alternatives using Shell built-ins (or Perl functions) could be > possible. e.g. Using ((num++)) instead of `expr $num + 1`. In examples > where I had "fixed" anti-patterns, there was often a noticeable > improvement (mostly realized in the form of faster runtime). I have > also written a dirty parser and put together basic "guides" to go > about this: http://bsravanin.blogspot.com/search/label/anti-patterns. > > Among Cygwin packages, bash-completion has some of the highest > programming anti-patterns, but there are various others as well. Does > this seem like a useful idea? If it is, what could be a good way of > going about implementing it? I don't use bash-completion myself, but my understanding is that it can be very slow, if for no other reason than fork() is slow in cygwin. If your de-anti-pattern transformation causes fewer calls to fork() -- and the above expr example suggests it does -- it could be very worthwhile. Implementation-wise, you probably want to start here: http://www.cygwin.com/contrib.html Ryan -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple