Re: Regular expressions speedup

kszabo@bcml120x.ca.nortel.com (Kevin Szabo)
10 Aug 2005 11:54:23 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Regular expressions speedup cleos@nb.sympatico-dot-ca.remove (Cleo Saulnier) (2005-08-05)
Re: Regular expressions speedup haberg@math.su.se (2005-08-07)
Re: Regular expressions speedup cleos@nb.sympatico.ca (Cleo Saulnier) (2005-08-07)
Re: Regular expressions speedup haberg@math.su.se (2005-08-10)
Re: Regular expressions speedup bonzini@gnu.org (Paolo Bonzini) (2005-08-10)
Re: Regular expressions speedup dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2005-08-10)
Re: Regular expressions speedup kszabo@bcml120x.ca.nortel.com (2005-08-10)
Re: Regular expressions speedup jburgy@gmail.com (2005-08-10)
Re: Regular expressions speedup torbenm@diku.dk (2005-08-13)
Re: Regular expressions speedup cleos@nb.sympatico-dot-ca.remove (Cleo Saulnier) (2005-08-13)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: kszabo@bcml120x.ca.nortel.com (Kevin Szabo)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 10 Aug 2005 11:54:23 -0400
Organization: Nortel, Carling Campus
References: 05-08-023 05-08-028
Keywords: lex

  our esteemed moderator wrote:
>[I wonder if they feel differently about space tradeoffs now than they
>did 30 years ago. At that point, programs had to fit into 16 bit address
>spaces. -John]


Indeed a good question.


However, small spaces ( < 128 kbyte ) are still useful since they allow the
application to spend much more of their life in cache. This is one of a number
of counter-intuitive cases where there is no speed-space trade-off. Sometimes
keeping the executable small makes it faster simply because they stay in cache.


I remember that there were some arguments in the early 90s about Smalltalk
executing at competitive speeds (with respect to C/C++) simply because its
VM and JIT compiler fit nicely into cache. Sorry, I don't have references.


Kevin



Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.