Re: Reminder: Review for Zach's parsing library starts on Feb 19th

From: Vinnie Falco (vinnie.falco_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-02-29 23:39:54

On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 3:14 PM Christian Mazakas via Boost
<boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I copy-pasted the JSON example from the Parser repo and then did
> an informal comparison to Boost.JSON.

As I alluded to before the review started, that is grossly unfair.
Boost.Parser is not optimized for JSON, and your Boost.Parser
benchmark is also not optimized. I know this because optimizing the
benchmark would take weeks and that amount of time hasn't yet elapsed.
JSON uses custom memory allocators. I did not look too closely at
Parser, but I am not sure if it has the API needed to customize how
allocations are performed (I see Parser's implementation calls some
"push_back" function in hot code paths). Zach could weigh in on this.

For a fair comparison, you would need this:

1. Boost.Parser offers sufficient customization so that an allocator
optimized for JSON can be used
2. An optimized container for storing JSON is used (such as boost::json::value)
3. The benchmark for measuring Boost.Parser's JSON parsing performance
is optimized

> For one, Boost.JSON should just export a proper CMake target like all the
> other compiled Boost libraries.

If that does not negatively impact certain workflows (well, mine) then
the maintainer should do this.

Thanks