Exa - A Modern Replacement for ls

Re:Exa - A Modern Replacement for ls by johnisgood on Monday December 20, 2021 @12:03PM (#29627083)

Yes, it matters to me because I use it often, and many directories have lots of files in them.

I do not care if the difference is 200 ms vs 250 ms, but if it is 1 sec vs 10 seconds, then yeah, it is a deal-breaker.

I did not try exa, so I cannot speak against it, nor in favor of it. It would only be fair if I used it and noticed that there are significant performance issues with it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Exa - A Modern Replacement for ls by ynx on Monday December 20, 2021 @12:17PM (#29627234)

I don't think anyone would use a tool if it were 180x slower than the alternative. I strongly doubt that's the case here.

(to clarify the "180x" math: (10s - 1s) / (250ms - 200ms) = 9s / 50ms = 180)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Exa - A Modern Replacement for ls by johnisgood on Monday December 20, 2021 @12:27PM (#29627340)

I only took a quick glance at the OP's https://asciinema.org stuff. Exa seemed way slower in comparison to ls. Again, I would have to test it myself and see how much it affects me if at all. That said, I do not see a reason to switch to it because ls supports colors as well, and I do not need the added extra information. Welp.

[ Parent | on HN ]