[boost] Re: Regexp code bloat

From: Andrei Alexandrescu (andrewalex_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-24 09:59:06

"John Maddock" <jm_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:012c01c27b4b$894d3fa0$cd9f193e_at_1016031671...
> If you compile and link as a static library then you obviously only link
to
> what you need, and code size should be in the 100K range (it depends a bit
> on which traits class you use - if you start using std::locale then code
> size can go up quite a bit).

That's more like it, but still a 2x away from what would be (imho)
acceptable.

> I suppose I should refactor into multiple shared libs, but IMO that's a
> maintenance nightmare: I'm not saying it won't happen, just that it's not
as
> trivial as it sounds :-(

Yup. Let me point out that it's much more useful than

> Finally there is one problem here: because regexes are interpreted
strings,
> you pay for every feature you might use, not for those that you actually
do
> use.  User feedback up until now has been driving towards more features
not
> less, on the other hand you could probably put together a very basic
> toy-regex implementation in about 10K, IMO it's use would be very limited
> though.

Not what I think. If you're like me, most of the time you have simple
parsing needs. Heck, I've parsed my tax data with a couple of simple rules.

True, many will have more complex needs. The point is that users should pay
for what they need, not the whole thing at once. This could be achieved by
compiling versions with limited feature sets, even though the regex is
interpreted. As things stand right now, the two mamooth regexp libraries are
a perfect motivator for regular programmers (heh, that's a pun) to roll
their own.

Andrei

--
All new!  THE C++ Seminar: Oct. 28-30 in Vancouver, WA.
http://www.thecppseminar.com/