4 ms·
That doesn't seem like an efficient way to do it. Commands that process file in place (sed -i) write to a temporary file in the same filesystem and then rename
by tarruda 6y ago
That doesn't seem like an efficient way to do it.
Commands that process file in place (sed -i) write to a temporary file in the same filesystem and then rename to the target file, which works if you want to process files that don't fit into memory.
- mslm 6y agoWithout inspecting the implementation of `sponge` that's how I assumed it already internally worked.
- jpab 6y agoI apologise, I was speaking loosely. I don't know if sponge collects input in memory or in a file. (Frankly I've never needed to care since the files I've ever needed this tool for have all been small)