From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-10-26 08:22:32
From: "Eugene Lazutkin" <eugene.lazutkin_at_[hidden]>
> > Just for the sake of argument, let's say that I could implement my
> > own regex-like needs in 25K instead of the 'bloated' 50K from regex++
> > ... are you really saying that the extra (let's be pessimistic and
> > round it up) 10 seconds will stop a users from downloading an app?
> Hand-made code was about 1k --- we didn't require full-blown regexp on
> dynamic patterns. Anyway, I am really saying that space considerations are
> still valid in age of Internet. In our case it was not a function of money
> ("1G of HDD now costs N times less that in 1962!"), it was function of
> user's patience. Please see below.
Strange discussion. It is obvious that the best custom code matching custom
requirements can never be larger or slower than generic code with a large
user base matching a wider set of requirements. If you try to design a
"regex lite" it will inevitably evolve into something very similar to
Boost.Regex or GRETA, unless you ignore user feedback, in which case the
library will be ignored by the users.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk