Re: [Boost-users] boost.regex vs perl

From: Jin Sun (jinsun_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-11-22 15:38:46

the comparison  is very impressive.
i've been trying to find some proof to convince myself to use more 
boost.regex than perl.

thanks

Jeff Garland wrote:
> John Maddock wrote:
>   
>> Jeff Garland wrote:
>>     
>
>   
>>> That said, it's one data point and what you're doing may have totally
>>> different results.  That's not to mention the effect of the compiler
>>> -- gcc doesn't have a greatest reputation for optimization although
>>> it's been improving.  And, you're also depending on other programmers
>>> to write good benchmarks.
>>>       
>> Yep, looking at the source code for the test, my first impression is that 
>> most of the time is likely to be taken up with the iostream code.  I also 
>>     
>
> Interesting...
>
>   
>> notice that the C-language PCRE test takes almost exactly the same amount of 
>> time as the two C++ / Boost-Regex tests, in spite of avoiding high level 
>> constructs like std::string.  
>>     
>
> Yeah, it makes me generally suspicious about the benchmark quality when a 
> scripting language like perl outperforms C -- just because the internals of 
> perl (and most everything else for that matter) are written in C.  But in the 
> case of regex I guess I can believe that the perl folks may have written a 
> highly optimized regex implementation (in C of course) that makes things run fast.
>
>  > Might be tempting to try and do better...
>
> As I understand the shootout rules you're free to make it better :-)
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users
>
>   

-- 
Jin Sun
MS-CS
Michigan Technological University
1400 Townsend Dr.
Houghton, MI-49931.
Phone #: [phone](H)
          [phone](O)
http://www.cs.mtu.edu/~jinsun