This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini@oracle.com> wrote: > About the < 2, in general hardcoding a parameter value in the code isn't a > nice idea. Why don't we take it out to a macro, say > _GLIBCXX_REGEX_NFA_QUANTIFIERS_LIMIT? In stl_deque.h we have something > similar and in the present case it would be even safe from the ABI point of > view, if I'm not mistaken. I here use a const static local variable to hide it from other parts. > Finally, you mentioned the DFA optimization: I would like to see some > details about it. Would it be a big win in all cases? Before we freeze the > next ABI we should keep open all the possibilities... It'll be great help to implement partial DFA compilation for all cases, though DFA cannot handle back-references neither. I need more time to investigate. Thanks! -- Tim Shen
Attachment:
a.patch
Description: Binary data
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |