On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 11:02:52PM +0100, Nick wrote: > > Bah. There's a balance to be struck. Scripts which aren't awful > should be supported. The issue is whether using cut constitutes > 'awful'. I think it does not. There are legitimate cases where it's > simpler and clearer than awk/sed. >
The question is: since cut can be implemented IN awk, why should it get a separate C binary? Anyone nattering about performance in a shell script is barking up the wrong tree.
