Re: About code

[francisco dominguez]

Thanks for response.

I only was some code because i want learn C and surprised me the different
between both codes.

But for example, i try find the "error string" when type "cp" without
arguments, but i can not find it.



2017-01-12 23:55 GMT+01:00 Eric Blake <address@hidden>:

> On 01/12/2017 03:53 PM, francisco dominguez wrote:
> > I have a little doubt as to the gnu code, why is it so complex and long?
> > Other systems facing the same problem have a much simpler implementation,
> > for example the ls command in gnu:
> >
> > http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=coreutils.git;a=blob;f=src/ls.c;h=
> 556313c71ebeb853c3fe9cf3c0312639de8aded0;hb=HEAD
> >
> > And in other system, for example, freebsd, is more simple:
> >
> > https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd/blob/master/bin/ls/ls.c
>
> Most likely because GNU ls has more features than FreeBSD ls.  There's
> probably also some code cost for robustness issues (such as trying hard
> for minimal-width columns that are always aligned, rather than being
> lazy by over-spacing things or having an extra-wide column throw off
> alignment of the remaining columns).
>
> There's other things factoring into your comparison: the files you point
> to show less than 1000 lines for FreeBSD ls.c, compared to more than
> 5000 lines for GNU ls.c, but you did not account for how many lines are
> in other files that get linked together to form the final executable.
> For example, a quick search of the BSD code shows a variable named
> 'attrs_off' which is only referenced twice in the file, so to find how
> the variable is actually used you have to go browsing around for another
> .c file.  So file size is a very poor measure of executable complexity.
>
> Your question is very broad.  Is there any specific feature that you are
> comparing side-by-side, and wondering what the difference is?
>
> --
> Eric Blake   eblake redhat com    +1-919-301-3266
> Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
>
>