[GRASS-dev] Re: [GRASS-SVN] r30420 -
grass/trunk/scripts/v.db.renamecol
Maciej Sieczka
tutey at o2.pl
Mon Mar 3 07:52:43 EST 2008
Markus Neteler pisze:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 11:53 AM, Maciej Sieczka <tutey at o2.pl> wrote:
>>>> Markus wrote:
>>> Maciek wrote:
>> Hamish pisze:
>>> 'wc -c filename' will produce output like: '17 filename' (needing awk
>>> or cut) while 'wc -c < filename' or 'cat filename | wc -c' will produce
>>> output like: '17'. Maybe that is the dark memory?
>> That could explain the " awk '{print $1}' ". Markus?
> Possibly yes. As said: darkly remembered...
>> In the end, v.db.renamcol without awk is as
>> fast as it was with awk.
> At this point I don't see why do this effort.
> There is the risk to introduce new bugs
Well yes there is as always.
> (as seen here)
My awk to cut switch didn't introduce any bugs. No any new bugs were
introduced at all. The only controversial change was:
- g.message -e 'User break!'
+ g.message -e "User break!"
which could (as Hamish says) but unlikely (as Ivan says) cause shell to
expand the exclamation mark. Anyway - I reverted that, as single quotes
are 100% safe. Glad Hamish pointed it out to me and sorry again.
Let me remind that the main point of my patches for v.db.renamecol and
v.db.dropcol was to correct a bug that the key column was always assumed
to be "cat". Fixed that. Other changes were BTW.
> and there is no point in saving 7% of 10 nanoseconds.
There is no speed gain at all.
> Since awk is needed in GRASS it can also be used here.
> Why not using efforts for more important things?
Like I said, awk to cut change that was just done BTW fixing bugs.
Maciek
More information about the grass-dev
mailing list