Back to home page

DOS ain't dead

Forum index page

Log in | Register

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view

about to fix the "final" doslfn bug (Announce)

posted by jadoxa Homepage E-mail, Queensland, Australia, 10.04.2022, 04:54

> Are the screenshots sufficient information for you to gauge relative
> performance of doslfnMS with doslfn?

If you're going to test both, then you should really be using the new version, so here it is.

> I was a bit lazy, so instead of writing times down, I adjusted the command
> prompt to show the highest resolution time.

Try rt from my Run package. Internal commands use a colon prefix: rt :dir .... Unfortunately, it writes its output to stdout, so redirecting to NUL won't work.

> With my batch method above - I was wondering if a cache of the DIR is going
> to impact the second and third DIRs? i.e. 1st time for DIR would be "long",
> but if DIR table is now in cache, subsequent DIR of the same folder would
> be both shorter and the same time to do.

Pretty much. The difference will be in disk writes. I noticed that when I extracted Japheth's test.zip each subsequent extraction was slower than the previous; the fifth was a second slower than the first. That was on the RAM drive; both versions were about the same time in MS-DOS.

 

Complete thread:

Back to the forum
Board view  Mix view
22632 Postings in 2109 Threads, 402 registered users, 345 users online (0 registered, 345 guests)
DOS ain't dead | Admin contact
RSS Feed
powered by my little forum