Dual-licensed under MIT or the UNLICENSE.
To use this crate, add walkdir
as a dependency to your project's Cargo.toml
:
[dependencies] walkdir = "2"
The following code recursively iterates over the directory given and prints the path for each entry:
use walkdir::WalkDir; for entry in WalkDir::new("foo") { let entry = entry.unwrap(); println!("{}", entry.path().display()); }
Or, if you'd like to iterate over all entries and ignore any errors that may arise, use filter_map
. (e.g., This code below will silently skip directories that the owner of the running process does not have permission to access.)
use walkdir::WalkDir; for entry in WalkDir::new("foo").into_iter().filter_map(|e| e.ok()) { println!("{}", entry.path().display()); }
The same code as above, except follow_links
is enabled:
use walkdir::WalkDir; for entry in WalkDir::new("foo").follow_links(true) { let entry = entry.unwrap(); println!("{}", entry.path().display()); }
This uses the filter_entry
iterator adapter to avoid yielding hidden files and directories efficiently:
use walkdir::{DirEntry, WalkDir}; fn is_hidden(entry: &DirEntry) -> bool { entry.file_name() .to_str() .map(|s| s.starts_with(".")) .unwrap_or(false) } let walker = WalkDir::new("foo").into_iter(); for entry in walker.filter_entry(|e| !is_hidden(e)) { let entry = entry.unwrap(); println!("{}", entry.path().display()); }
std::fs
has an unstable walk_dir
implementation that needed some design work. I started off on that task, but it quickly became apparent that walking a directory recursively is quite complex and may not be a good fit for std
right away.
This should at least resolve most or all of the issues reported here (and then some):
The short story is that performance is comparable with find
and glibc's nftw
on both a warm and cold file cache. In fact, I cannot observe any performance difference after running find /
, walkdir /
and nftw /
on my local file system (SSD, ~3 million entries). More precisely, I am reasonably confident that this crate makes as few system calls and close to as few allocations as possible.
I haven't recorded any benchmarks, but here are some things you can try with a local checkout of walkdir
:
# The directory you want to recursively walk: DIR=$HOME # If you want to observe perf on a cold file cache, run this before *each* # command: sudo sh -c 'echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches' # To warm the caches find $DIR # Test speed of `find` on warm cache: time find $DIR # Compile and test speed of `walkdir` crate: cargo build --release --example walkdir time ./target/release/examples/walkdir $DIR # Compile and test speed of glibc's `nftw`: gcc -O3 -o nftw ./compare/nftw.c time ./nftw $DIR # For shits and giggles, test speed of Python's (2 or 3) os.walk: time python ./compare/walk.py $DIR
On my system, the performance of walkdir
, find
and nftw
is comparable.