3 ms·

what the fuck? I specified POSIX alternatives to non-POSIX uses in the code. only one feature, brace expansion, is not POSIX, so I specifically did not recommen

what the fuck? I specified POSIX alternatives to non-POSIX uses in the code. only one feature, brace expansion, is not POSIX, so I specifically did not recommend its use.

acqq 7y ago
I’m sorry if I misunderstood you. I’m indeed interested in what from all you wrote is then what you would suggest to be changed, as I also looked at his code and also read here that it was done in short time so I also believer there are possibilities for improvement. Specifically, reimplementing sha calculation itself should be a non goal, in my opinion. Just that the .sh code itself works on all POSIX shells, not that the whole system has to be POSIX only: calculating sha in shell is surely not the point of demonstrating how git works.
acqq 7y ago
Th specific part that I understood as your argument for non-POSIX solutions: "'for x in $y; do printf "$a%s$b" "$x"; done' is equivalent to 'printf "$a%s$b" $y' (assuming neither a nor b contain format specifiers). similarly, 'for i in {1..100}; do printf "$a"; done' is equivalent to 'printf "$a%s.0" {1..100}'. unfortunately, brace expansion is not POSIX, but these are both significantly more efficient (both in code size and execution time) than the loop methods." I didn't understand why you write that part at all, considering the goals of the program we discuss (which is to demonstrate some git primitives in POSIX compliant shell code).
- Hello71 7y ago
  'for x in $y; do printf "$a%s$b" "$x"; done' is used in the code already. I am proposing that it be changed to 'printf "$a%s$b" $y', which is also POSIX compliant, shorter (even including a comment), and faster. I included the part about brace expansion as a side note, not proposing that it be used.
  - acqq 7y ago
    > 'printf "$a%s$b" $y', which is also POSIX compliant, shorter Yes, indeed, thanks for pointing that, it's documented: "The format operand shall be reused as often as necessary to satisfy the argument operands." https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/printf.html https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/p...

what the fuck? I specified POSIX alternatives to non-POSIX uses in the code. only one feature, brace expansion, is not POSIX, so I specifically did not recommend its use.

acqq 7y ago

I’m sorry if I misunderstood you. I’m indeed interested in what from all you wrote is then what you would suggest to be changed, as I also looked at his code and also read here that it was done in short time so I also believer there are possibilities for improvement. Specifically, reimplementing sha calculation itself should be a non goal, in my opinion. Just that the .sh code itself works on all POSIX shells, not that the whole system has to be POSIX only: calculating sha in shell is surely not the point of demonstrating how git works.

acqq 7y ago

Th specific part that I understood as your argument for non-POSIX solutions: "'for x in $y; do printf "$a%s$b" "$x"; done' is equivalent to 'printf "$a%s$b" $y' (assuming neither a nor b contain format specifiers). similarly, 'for i in {1..100}; do printf "$a"; done' is equivalent to 'printf "$a%s.0" {1..100}'. unfortunately, brace expansion is not POSIX, but these are both significantly more efficient (both in code size and execution time) than the loop methods." I didn't understand why you write that part at all, considering the goals of the program we discuss (which is to demonstrate some git primitives in POSIX compliant shell code).

Hello71 7y ago
'for x in $y; do printf "$a%s$b" "$x"; done' is used in the code already. I am proposing that it be changed to 'printf "$a%s$b" $y', which is also POSIX compliant, shorter (even including a comment), and faster. I included the part about brace expansion as a side note, not proposing that it be used.
- acqq 7y ago
  > 'printf "$a%s$b" $y', which is also POSIX compliant, shorter Yes, indeed, thanks for pointing that, it's documented: "The format operand shall be reused as often as necessary to satisfy the argument operands." https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/printf.html https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/p...