This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the cygwin project.
RE: igncr vs text mode mounts, performance vs compatibility
- From: "Gary R. Van Sickle" <g dot r dot vansickle at worldnet dot att dot net>
- To: "'The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List'" <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:31:59 -0500
- Subject: RE: igncr vs text mode mounts, performance vs compatibility
- Reply-to: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List <cygwin-talk at cygwin dot com>
> From: Dave Korn
> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 8:37 AM
> To: Thread TITTTL'd!
> Subject: RE: igncr vs text mode mounts, performance vs compatibility
> On 25 October 2006 04:30, Gary R. Van Sickle wrote:
> > I'm just curious here: *Why* do you (or anybody else) want
> bash to not
> > ignore \r's
> Having a "senior moment", Gary? The answer's exactly the
> same as last time you posted this question: because of the
> enormous commercial possibilities^W^W[*] performance gains
> obtained by not having to read the entire file a single byte
> at a time.
No no no Korns, you've misunderstood Eric's statement and my question based
thereupon. Eric made a statement about "those of us who WANT literal \r as
required by POSIX" being able to circumvent the correct,
non-speed-compromised, "do-the-right-thing" behavior that he is
(re-)implementing. My question was, to paraphrase, "Why would anybody want
the old, broken behavior?" Seems a bit silly to walk when you can ride,
don't you agree?
Gary R. Van Sickle