Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!romp!auschs!cello!reed!d75!awdprime!nostromo.austin.ibm.com!daveb
From: daveb@nostromo.austin.ibm.com (Dave Burton)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: First-line-only editing, part 2: Portable solutions
Summary: last time. really.
Message-ID: <4152@awdprime.UUCP>
Date: 8 Nov 90 17:42:47 GMT
References: <16471:Oct2420:13:4390@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <4031@awdprime.UUCP> <687@npdiss1.StPaul.NCR.COM>
Sender: news@awdprime.UUCP
Reply-To: daveb@bach.austin.ibm.com (Dave Burton)
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin, TX
Lines: 22

In article <16471:Oct2420:13:4390@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
|As shown in my previous message, sed is much slower than a head-sed-cat
|combination on a particular 300K file. ...
| So the fastest portable solution I've seen is
|  head -1 file | sed 's/.../.../'; tail +2 file

In article <4031@awdprime.UUCP> daveb@bach.austin.ibm.com (Dave Burton) writes:
|[ no, try: ]
|sed 's/.../.../;1q' < file > outfile

which, of course, doesn't output the entire file.  Therefore, it seems that
the "fastest portable solution" [we've] seen is:

sed 's/.../.../;1q' file; tail +2 file
	or
(sed 's/.../.../;1q'; tail +2) < file

Now, truly, nuff said. :-)
--
Dave Burton
inet: daveb@bach.austin.ibm.com
uucp: cs.utexas.edu!ibmchs!auschs!nostromo!daveb