On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:56 AM, Jorge Chamorro wrote: ... You may well be right that a regexp based one is faster (given JS lack of
Message 1 of 4
, Mar 27, 2008
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 1:56 AM, Jorge Chamorro <jorge@...> wrote:
> Also, I wonder why did you "feel the need" to rewrite the parser
> without RegExps ?
> This one should run (much?) slower, I mean, vs the native speed of
> RegExps, or not ?
> Why/when would you choose one version over the other ?
You may well be right that a regexp based one is faster (given JS'
lack of efficient string/char manipulation methods), but performance
is one area where intuition often leads astray. One should not try to
guess which is faster, but to measure.
So it would be great to get a performance test to verify which is
faster (and on which JS engines) and by how much.
-+ Tatu +-
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.
Changes have not been saved
Press OK to abandon changes or Cancel to continue editing
Your browser is not supported
Kindly note that Groups does not support 7.0 or earlier versions of Internet Explorer.
We recommend upgrading to the latest Internet Explorer, Google Chrome, or Firefox. If you are using IE 9 or later, make sure you turn off Compatibility View.