| www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
On 6/1/2010 6:18 PM, Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote: > Thanks for this information and perhaps I'm wrong but I don't believe > anyone in this thread thought that you were lying when you noted issues > with the performance of stat(). ;-) But providing a variant of stat() > along the lines of what you propose above is not practical for all the > reasons already stated. I believe we would all like stat() to be > quicker but we need something that solves the root of the problem and > not partial, hidden solutions that are problematic to use. Agreed. But here's a wondering. What if, perhaps via autoconf flags or something (I know next to nothing about autoconf, so please ignore that part of it if it is completely off base), we could make it possible for someone who is porting a package to cygwin to indicate what features of stat that program needs. This would be optional to do, and could be applied as porters have time, etc. Now ideally such an approach could be applied differentially to different calls of stat, but even if it is global, maybe it would help speed up some programs a lot ... Again, just wondering about whether something like this might get the community somewhere better in performance ... Regards -- Eliot Moss -- 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
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |