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 | ------------------------------------------------------