From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14432 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2004 14:18:44 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 4 Oct 2004 14:18:44 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CETfo-0001jd-6S for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 04 Oct 2004 14:18:44 +0000 Received: (qmail 26344 invoked by uid 89); 4 Oct 2004 14:18:43 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 6752 invoked from network); 4 Oct 2004 14:18:42 +0000 Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 15:14:32 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <20041004151432.42569739@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <200410040852.42322.tradergt@smelser.org> References: <41586F16.5020409@gentoo.org> <200409291119.01428.pauldv@gentoo.org> <200410040852.42322.tradergt@smelser.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12a (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="Signature=_Mon__4_Oct_2004_15_14_32_+0100_K=2za+sZt=aC5ZvI" Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: removing dhcpcd from system??? X-Archives-Salt: b6fc0404-e802-43ea-9998-1b548939c3d3 X-Archives-Hash: 3920b345658ecdbc88ca5f5e8d055fdd --Signature=_Mon__4_Oct_2004_15_14_32_+0100_K=2za+sZt=aC5ZvI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 4 Oct 2004 08:52:37 -0500 Jeff Smelser wrote: | On Monday 04 October 2004 04:38 am, Terje Kvernes wrote: | > ack. besides, no programming language out there will help Portage | > by anything but design. I/O is the bottleneck, and heck, I've | > seen faster I/O in perl than in C. | | If thats the case, it usually means bad code.. Naah, it just means 'normal' code. Perl's generally pretty good in its choice of algorithms and how it buffers and resizes data. glibc, on the other hand, gives you a bunch of generally poor algorithms and doesn't do any clever magic behind the scenes, so you've got to work really hard to get good code in c. Of course, if you *do* go to the trouble of reinventing the wheel over and over, you get faster code in c eventually. Simple case in point, compare strstr(3) to perl's string matching code... -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Sparc, MIPS, Vim, Fluxbox) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm --Signature=_Mon__4_Oct_2004_15_14_32_+0100_K=2za+sZt=aC5ZvI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBYVrK96zL6DUtXhERAtOTAJ9sV21zyBHVnvA/ArH7pHlhgldKVgCfaLi7 MC5afzMrzr2//3uBMnXm/Tg= =0Plv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Mon__4_Oct_2004_15_14_32_+0100_K=2za+sZt=aC5ZvI--