Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:33:16 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>, Garance A Drosehn <gad@freebsd.org>, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Attempt #3, adding a new command 'sfilter' Message-ID: <450065EC.7040604@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200609071057.44515.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200608281545.k7SFjn6l063922@lurza.secnetix.de> <44FF71AD.7060508@FreeBSD.org> <44FF72B9.7000201@elischer.org> <200609071057.44515.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John Baldwin wrote: >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. > > so, instead of "add 20 lines of C and make something generally usefull, install another entire program"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?450065EC.7040604>