| |||||||||||||
valid?valid?Posted Sep 9, 2010 23:02 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)In reply to: valid? by marcH Parent article: Another old security problem
I totally disagree. I love no longer needing to worry about find and xargs all the time. Does a dir have tens of thousands of files? Who cares! Just glob away, it just works.
A gigabytes argv would be a stretch. But megabytes? That seems pretty reasonable to me.
(Log in to post comments)
valid? Posted Sep 15, 2010 0:51 UTC (Wed) by roelofs (guest, #2599) [Link] A gigabytes argv would be a stretch. But megabytes? That seems pretty reasonable to me.Absolutely. A minor side project of mine involves the generation of 35000 time-series images per year, each with a name of the form "fubar-XX-yyyymmdd-hhmm-UTC.png". As a same-dir glob, that works out to just over a megabyte; add a "yyyy/" directory prefix and multiple years, and you're easily into the 10MB range. Increase the time resolution by a factor of 3 to 5, and you're well on your way to 100MB. (And yes, it's very cool to watch a full-year sequence animate, particularly on a fast machine; a 5- or 10-year sequence would be even better, assuming I could hit 60fps on the decode.) Of course, at some point it becomes a database-driven custom app, but 10MB command lines are not out of the question with the trivial hack I have so far. Greg
|
|||||||||||||