Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #729
| From | Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: lexer speed, was Bison |
| Date | 2012-08-21 07:40 +0100 |
| Organization | Compilers Central |
| Message-ID | <12-08-012@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <12-08-005@comp.compilers> <12-08-006@comp.compilers> <12-08-008@comp.compilers> <12-08-011@comp.compilers> |
BGB schrieb: > 1: actually, my C parser uses a pretty big hash for type-name lookup, > namely 16k entry IIRC, whereas for most other things 1024 or 4096 entry > is plenty sufficient (for a chain-hash). The global (top level) symbol table can become very big, in detail in C compilers. A separate table for type names is not required. > the main reason for this is the > large number of typedefs in headers like "windows.h", which can easily > saturate a 1024 or 4096 entry hash. Right. AFAIR I added capabilities to skip already processed header files, at least when a guard is detected. Such (not fully conforming) behaviour can influence the time spent with loading the same files moreoften. > I have used bigger hash tables though, namely for things like interning > strings (64k) and dynamic+interface method-dispatch (256k, but this one > is an open-address hash). > > >> DoDi >> [The benchmarks I did were a while ago, but they showed a large >> fraction of time in the lexer. I wouldn't disagree that building the >> symbol table is slow, but figure out some estimate of the ratio of >> the number of characters in a source file to the number of tokens, >> and that is a rough estimate of how much slower the lexer will be >> than the parser. I agree that some current analyses would be useful. >> -John] >> > > yep. > > can't compare exactly, as my parsers tend to be recursive-descent and > build ASTs directly. The same for my compilers. My C to Pascal converter uses an LL(1) parser, with only one exception where LL(2) lookahead is required. Expressions are parsed differently, using an table-driven parser for operator precedence and associativity. The preprocessor is implemented in a couple of filter stages between the lexer and parser. P.S.: When the time for loading source files can be separated from other lexer tasks, I'd expect that this operation takes most of the time. DoDi
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Bison deterministic LALR(1) parser for Java/C++ (kind of complex langauge) without 'lexar hack' support hsad005@gmail.com - 2012-08-17 11:22 -0700
Re: Bison deterministic LALR(1) parser for Java/C++ (kind of complex langauge) without 'lexar hack' support Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> - 2012-08-18 10:13 +0100
Re: lexer speed, was Bison Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> - 2012-08-20 01:01 +0100
Re: lexer speed, was Bison Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> - 2012-08-20 16:14 +0100
Re: lexer speed, was Bison BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-20 14:14 -0500
Re: lexer speed, was Bison Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@aol.com> - 2012-08-21 07:40 +0100
Re: lexer speed, was Bison "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-21 17:39 +0100
Re: Bison deterministic LALR(1) parser for Java/C++ (kind of complex langauge) without 'lexar hack' support anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-08-20 13:35 +0000
Re: Bison deterministic LALR(1) parser for Java/C++ (kind of complex langauge) without 'lexar hack' support BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-21 14:45 -0500
Re: Bison deterministic LALR(1) parser for Java/C++ (kind of complex langauge) without 'lexar hack' support "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-22 14:04 +0100
Re: Bison deterministic LALR(1) parser for Java/C++ (kind of complex langauge) without 'lexar hack' support BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-08-26 19:37 -0500
Bison deterministic LALR parser for Java/C++ "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-08-29 22:03 +0100
speeding up C recompilation, was Re: Bison deterministic LALR BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-09-04 13:45 -0500
Re: C include handling, was Bison deterministic LALR Marco van de Voort <marcov@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-09-05 08:40 +0000
Re: Bison deterministic LALR(1) parser for Java/C++ (kind of complex langauge) without 'lexar hack' support hsad005@gmail.com - 2012-08-18 02:09 -0700
csiph-web