[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11
- From: Miles Bader <miles@...>
- Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:42:36 +0900
Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@inf.puc-rio.br> writes:
>> I find this a little surprising ... I'd think that even with lpeg.Cmt
>> around each clause, that wouldn't be any more expensive than
>> repeatedly calling lpeg.match for each clause instead...
>>
>> Any clues as to why it's slower?
>
> It is indeed a little surprising... Maybe the capture is interfering
> with some specific LPeg optimization?
Any hints how I can debug it?
If it's only certain inputs that are slower, maybe I can at least try
to find out which ones, beyond that, I'm not sure how to tell what's
happening internally...
-miles
--
Apologize, v. To lay the foundation for a future offense.
- References:
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Miles Bader
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Miles Bader
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Patrick Donnelly
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Miles Bader
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Miles Bader
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Miles Bader
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Patrick Donnelly
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Miles Bader
- Re: [ANN] LPeg 0.11, Roberto Ierusalimschy