From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 7 05:25:21 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D920916A4E2; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 05:25:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sippysoft.com (gk.360sip.com [72.236.70.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506C643D46; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 05:25:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [192.168.0.49] ([204.244.149.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by sippysoft.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k875PEOA080371 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 6 Sep 2006 22:25:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sobomax@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <44FFAD2A.30009@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 22:24:58 -0700 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Sippy Software, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Elischer References: <200608281545.k7SFjn6l063922@lurza.secnetix.de> <200609020956.54008.Lucas.James@ldjcs.com.au> <20060902031247.GE749@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <20060904192006.GA3292@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <44FD994C.70104@errno.com> <44FDEE7C.9060104@FreeBSD.org> <44FDF245.9000302@elischer.org> <44FDF36A.3010608@FreeBSD.org> <44FF71AD.7060508@FreeBSD.org> <44FF72B9.7000201@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <44FF72B9.7000201@elischer.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, Doug Barton , Garance A Drosehn , Peter Jeremy Subject: Re: Attempt #3, adding a new command 'sfilter' X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 05:25:21 -0000 Julian Elischer wrote: > Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >> Why not just write simple 5-line script in your favorite scripting >> language (perl, python, ruby etc) that does just this and forget about >> it? I don't think performance is really a concern here since the most >> time this program will spend waiting for the I/O anyway, so that doing >> it in C makes little or no sense. >> >> IMHO this is one of the reasons we do have all those lightweight >> languages around - to avoid having separate utility and/or command >> line option for each and every particular situation. >> >> -Maxim > > > > perl is not lightweight to install on a machine. > have you seen how much crap gets installed when you add perl? Well, with the current disk space $/MB ratio it *is* lightweight. ;-) > lightweight is adding 100 instructions or so to 'date'. > or adding the strftime instruction to awk (as it is in gawk) Adding strftime to awk looks like better approach, since awk essentially is a scripting language. -Maxim