Re: Fusion-ifying proto parse trees

Joel de Guzman wrote:
> Eric Niebler wrote:
> > Time taken to construct the ET and traverse it was measured. The 
> > winner by a wide margin is (3) segmented proto.
>
> Great! It would be nice if the 1) time taken to construct the ET
> and 2) the time to traverse it, are reported separately. For spirit,
> while 1 is important, 2 is more important by a wide margin. It's
> a balance, I can tolerate a few clock cycles for 1 if that would
> improve 2. So, it's very important to see both timings.


What is it about Spirit's usage scenario that makes traversal time more 
important than ET construction time? I ask because it could affect the 
design. My understanding is that you wanted the first-phase proto ET to 
be immediately executable because people declare rules inline in calls 
to spirit::parse, where they are immediately executed without the 
opportunity for a 2nd ET phase. In this scenario, it seems to me the 
only thing that matters is end-to-end time: ET construction + traversal. 
Or have I been working with the wrong usage scenario in mind?


> It would also be nice to see the App footprint, but I guess it's
> too early to do that now.


What is "App footprint"? Code size? Memory usage?


--
Eric Niebler
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com


-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642