Is bash in windows implemented differently from native bash, specifically for loops
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I ran the following command on mac in an ad hoc fashion in mac store:
time for x in 1..5000000; do if ! (($x % 10000)); then echo $x; fi done
to perform a very rudimentary benchmark. What this does is that it creates a list from 1 - 5000000, check if it's divisible by 10000, and print if it does. And time benchmark the time for the process to execute. I've been arriving at around 40 secs for macbook air, 32 for pros, all 8th gen intel processors. A particular pattern I noticed is that it freezes for a long time before printing out anything, presumably this is because it's creating a list from 1 to 5000000 and putting it in memory.
However, my friend who use windows reported faster times on gen 5 core m processor with Windows 10 native bash shell, on the order of 15 seconds. I suspect it's because windows bash treat for x in 1..5000000 as a generator. In this way the process never made into memory as everything would only needed to be stored in cache, achieving greater speed. Can anyone confirm that for loops for bash interpreter is the same/different across windows implementation and linux/mac implementations?
bash generator windows-subsystem-for-linux cpu-cache
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I ran the following command on mac in an ad hoc fashion in mac store:
time for x in 1..5000000; do if ! (($x % 10000)); then echo $x; fi done
to perform a very rudimentary benchmark. What this does is that it creates a list from 1 - 5000000, check if it's divisible by 10000, and print if it does. And time benchmark the time for the process to execute. I've been arriving at around 40 secs for macbook air, 32 for pros, all 8th gen intel processors. A particular pattern I noticed is that it freezes for a long time before printing out anything, presumably this is because it's creating a list from 1 to 5000000 and putting it in memory.
However, my friend who use windows reported faster times on gen 5 core m processor with Windows 10 native bash shell, on the order of 15 seconds. I suspect it's because windows bash treat for x in 1..5000000 as a generator. In this way the process never made into memory as everything would only needed to be stored in cache, achieving greater speed. Can anyone confirm that for loops for bash interpreter is the same/different across windows implementation and linux/mac implementations?
bash generator windows-subsystem-for-linux cpu-cache
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
Compare the results in same hardware.
– Biswapriyo
Nov 10 at 17:36
@Biswapriyo That's not possible, I don't own any hardware running windows.
– Rocky Li
Nov 10 at 19:37
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
I ran the following command on mac in an ad hoc fashion in mac store:
time for x in 1..5000000; do if ! (($x % 10000)); then echo $x; fi done
to perform a very rudimentary benchmark. What this does is that it creates a list from 1 - 5000000, check if it's divisible by 10000, and print if it does. And time benchmark the time for the process to execute. I've been arriving at around 40 secs for macbook air, 32 for pros, all 8th gen intel processors. A particular pattern I noticed is that it freezes for a long time before printing out anything, presumably this is because it's creating a list from 1 to 5000000 and putting it in memory.
However, my friend who use windows reported faster times on gen 5 core m processor with Windows 10 native bash shell, on the order of 15 seconds. I suspect it's because windows bash treat for x in 1..5000000 as a generator. In this way the process never made into memory as everything would only needed to be stored in cache, achieving greater speed. Can anyone confirm that for loops for bash interpreter is the same/different across windows implementation and linux/mac implementations?
bash generator windows-subsystem-for-linux cpu-cache
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
I ran the following command on mac in an ad hoc fashion in mac store:
time for x in 1..5000000; do if ! (($x % 10000)); then echo $x; fi done
to perform a very rudimentary benchmark. What this does is that it creates a list from 1 - 5000000, check if it's divisible by 10000, and print if it does. And time benchmark the time for the process to execute. I've been arriving at around 40 secs for macbook air, 32 for pros, all 8th gen intel processors. A particular pattern I noticed is that it freezes for a long time before printing out anything, presumably this is because it's creating a list from 1 to 5000000 and putting it in memory.
However, my friend who use windows reported faster times on gen 5 core m processor with Windows 10 native bash shell, on the order of 15 seconds. I suspect it's because windows bash treat for x in 1..5000000 as a generator. In this way the process never made into memory as everything would only needed to be stored in cache, achieving greater speed. Can anyone confirm that for loops for bash interpreter is the same/different across windows implementation and linux/mac implementations?
bash generator windows-subsystem-for-linux cpu-cache
bash generator windows-subsystem-for-linux cpu-cache
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
asked Nov 10 at 16:17
Rocky Li
2,7831316
2,7831316
Compare the results in same hardware.
– Biswapriyo
Nov 10 at 17:36
@Biswapriyo That's not possible, I don't own any hardware running windows.
– Rocky Li
Nov 10 at 19:37
add a comment |
Compare the results in same hardware.
– Biswapriyo
Nov 10 at 17:36
@Biswapriyo That's not possible, I don't own any hardware running windows.
– Rocky Li
Nov 10 at 19:37
Compare the results in same hardware.
– Biswapriyo
Nov 10 at 17:36
Compare the results in same hardware.
– Biswapriyo
Nov 10 at 17:36
@Biswapriyo That's not possible, I don't own any hardware running windows.
– Rocky Li
Nov 10 at 19:37
@Biswapriyo That's not possible, I don't own any hardware running windows.
– Rocky Li
Nov 10 at 19:37
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53240880%2fis-bash-in-windows-implemented-differently-from-native-bash-specifically-for-lo%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Compare the results in same hardware.
– Biswapriyo
Nov 10 at 17:36
@Biswapriyo That's not possible, I don't own any hardware running windows.
– Rocky Li
Nov 10 at 19:37