Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #5861
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux |
| Date | 5 Jul 2011 19:07:37 GMT |
| Organization | None |
| Lines | 93 |
| Message-ID | <97h5npFhaeU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <fpg7079ca2dtgipdphr8rm234kgmkd1t3l@4ax.com> <jcu707d1fb592i91m40fsjtfg0784knkd1@4ax.com> <97cq72FbqnU1@mid.individual.net> <20c411d9-8955-4f4c-9a78-fea7540ed9a1@p10g2000prf.googlegroups.com> |
| X-Trace | individual.net VvTaJGf6iJEHYvc83xgwoQfmUIKOMtSWCv/NrZxZhY9/jUZsED |
| X-Orig-Path | not-for-mail |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:7QoeTPumXq7oUeUY8p+koZ05cgk= |
| X-Newsreader | trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:5861 |
Show key headers only | View raw
In article <20c411d9-8955-4f4c-9a78-fea7540ed9a1@p10g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 3, 8:26 pm, blm...@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myreal...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > In article <jcu707d1fb592i91m40fsjtfg0784kn...@4ax.com>,
> > Gene Wirchenko <ge...@ocis.net> wrote:
[ snip ]
> > Another "no separate method" approach would be to use the String
> > class's indexOf method:
> >
> > static boolean StringLibSearch
> > (
> > char CurrChar
> > )
> > {
> > return IdentChars.indexOf(CurrChar) >= 0;
> > }
> >
> > I added this to your benchmark suite and found it to give performance
> > comparable to the TreeSet implementation (indeed, usually it was a
> > bit faster). The overhead of building the TreeSet probably doesn't
> > matter in the grand scheme of things, and probably it also doesn't
> > matter a lot that every call to the TreeSet's "contains" method
> > (AFAIK) has to convert a character primitive to a Character object,
> > but -- <shrug>.
> >
> > But if you're going to use a Set, why a TreeSet? As best I can tell,
> > you don't use/need the sorted-ness it provides. Just out of curiosity,
> > I also added to your benchmark suite something that declares the set
> > as a Set and creates it as an instance of HashSet, and the resulting
> > code was noticeably faster than any of the other alternatives.
> >
> > And finally, I wondered how all of these methods compared to
> > something using regular expressions (the java.util.regex classes), so
> > i tried that too, replacing your whole parse code with the following:
> >
> > import java.util.regex.*;
> >
> > // ....
> >
> > static Pattern IdentRegexPattern=Pattern.compile("[" + IdentChars + "]+");
> >
> > // ....
> >
> > // code to be called repeatedly from timing loop
> > static void ParseRegex()
> > {
> > Matcher IdentMatcher = IdentRegexPattern.matcher(cParseString);
> > String sIdent;
> > while (IdentMatcher.find())
> > {
> > sIdent = IdentMatcher.group();
> > if (nRepetitions==1)
> > System.out.println(sIdent);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > // ....
> >
> > This was a clear winner (with regard to performance) on the system
> > where I measured performance, *unless* I ran the tests with the
> > "-server" flag, in which case it took second place, behind the
> > HashSet-based approach. As I understand things, though, the
> > "-server" flag results in the compiler doing more to try to optimize
> > the code, including being more aggressive about eliminating dead
> > code, so I'm not entirely confident about the results I'm getting
> > being meaningful.
> >
> > (Probably your actual code needs to do something other than
> > finding and printing identifiers, so the above code would need
> > some adjustment. Still, if you like regular expressions, it's
> > another possibility, maybe .... )
> >
> > [ snip ]
> >
>
> Your points are excellent, but the ongoing violations of the naming
> conventions is making my brain hurt. Can't we please revert to
> conformant names in our replies at least?
Well .... I guess I figure it's a choice between two things that
seem desirable -- (1) working in with the conventions of the code
I'm modifying and (2) applying the conventions used by most Java
programmers. I chose the former, though it rather makes my brain
hurt as well. :-)?
--
B. L. Massingill
ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-23 16:03 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-23 16:26 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-27 21:41 +0000
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-23 17:24 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-23 19:46 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-07-04 03:26 +0000
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-04 03:41 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-07-05 19:07 +0000
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-23 17:34 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-23 19:42 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-23 18:30 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-23 19:48 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-23 21:02 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-06-24 08:38 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-24 09:04 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-06-26 13:43 -0400
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-06-26 14:31 -0400
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-24 11:45 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-24 12:19 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-26 20:39 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-26 23:33 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-27 13:53 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-27 18:03 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-28 11:41 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-06-24 19:19 +0000
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-23 19:36 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-24 11:50 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2011-06-24 17:25 -0400
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-26 20:42 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux markspace <-@.> - 2011-06-26 23:27 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-27 03:04 -0400
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-06-27 13:12 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-27 13:36 -0700
Re: Passing a Method Name to a Method, Redux Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-06-24 15:50 -0700
csiph-web