From c893d4d94e49982664908001057d16a056a923d8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mattias Andrée Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 17:02:58 +0200 Subject: m MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Signed-off-by: Mattias Andrée --- README | 15 +++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) diff --git a/README b/README index 040182a..fb0401a 100644 --- a/README +++ b/README @@ -2,6 +2,21 @@ GNU yes(1) is not that fast! This implementaion is not only about 8 times as fast[0], it uses half as much CPU. +Note that this implementation is not even +optimal, the overhead at the start can be +reduced by creating a buffer as large as +the pipe and fill that buffer and only do +one write(2) or vmsplice(2) to the pipe. +Speaking of this overhead, this implementation +is completely useless[1] unless the other +program is will even read {PIPE_BUF} bytes +(4096 on Linux, 512 on POSIX). Therefore, +this implementation of yes(1) is just silly +and should not be used by anyone. + [0] On my computer. If you get different results please leave a comment. + +[1] Has no benefits what so every in any + aspect at all. -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2