Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!debra
From: debra@alice.UUCP (Paul De Bra)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: Why fgrep?
Message-ID: <8495@alice.UUCP>
Date: 9 Dec 88 16:11:42 GMT
References: <1050@naucse.UUCP>
Reply-To: debra@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T, Bell Labs
Lines: 19

In article <1050@naucse.UUCP> sbw@naucse.UUCP (Steve Wampler) writes:
>In every machine I've played with, fgrep has never
>performed better than plain old grep for any data I've given
>it (and on some machines, it is *considerably* slower).
>...
>
>Just curious.

No big deal I would say:
I did a short comparison by searching for a fixed 6 character string in
a bunch of C-files.
grep took 10 times longer than gre, and fgrep took 14 times longer than gre...
too bad gre is not PD I believe...

Paul.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------
|debra@research.att.com   | uunet!research!debra     |
------------------------------------------------------