Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 10:57:43 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Garance A Drosehn <gad@freebsd.org>, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Subject: Re: Attempt #3, adding a new command 'sfilter' Message-ID: <200609071057.44515.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <44FF72B9.7000201@elischer.org> References: <200608281545.k7SFjn6l063922@lurza.secnetix.de> <44FF71AD.7060508@FreeBSD.org> <44FF72B9.7000201@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 21:15, 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? > > lightweight is adding 100 instructions or so to 'date'. > or adding the strftime instruction to awk (as it is in gawk) Why not install the gawk port on the machines you need this on rather than perl and use gawk then? It doesn't look to be that heavyweight of a port. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200609071057.44515.jhb>