Re: xxd -i vs DIY Was: C23 thoughts and opinions

On 29/05/2024 01:54, bart wrote:

On 28/05/2024 21:23, Michael S wrote:

On Tue, 28 May 2024 19:57:38 +0100

 

OK, I had go with your program. I used a random data file of exactly
100M bytes.
>
Runtimes varied from 4.1 to 5 seconds depending on compiler. The
fastest time was with gcc -O3.
>

>
It sounds like your mass storage device is much slower than aging SSD
on my test machine and ALOT slower than SSD of David Brown.

 David Brown's machines are always faster than anyone else's.

That seems /highly/ unlikely.  Admittedly the machine I tested on is fairly new - less than a year old.  But it's a little NUC-style machine at around the $1000 price range, with a laptop processor.  The only thing exciting about it is 64 GB ram (I like to run a lot of things at the same time in different workspaces).
But I am better than some people at getting my machines to run programs efficiently.  I don't use Windows for such things (I happily run Windows on a different machine for other purposes), and I certainly don't use layers of OS or filesystem emulation such as WSL and expect code to run at maximal speed.
And as I said in an earlier post, I didn't have the files on any kind of disk or SSD at all - they were all in a tmpfs filesystem to eliminate that bottleneck.