From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a65bb7bde679ed1d
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.35.68 with SMTP id f4mr32457304pbj.5.1322586530153;
        Tue, 29 Nov 2011 09:08:50 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 lh20ni38459pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:08:46 +0100
From: Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6;
 rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ann: Natools.Chunked_Strings, beta 1
References: <slrnjd9tpk.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <4ed4fc37$0$2537$ba4acef3@reader.news.orange.fr>
 <slrnjda2cc.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
In-Reply-To: <slrnjda2cc.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
Message-ID: <4ed5119e$0$7619$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
Organization: Arcor
NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 Nov 2011 18:08:46 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: cfa904f4.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=E<H4B^n3[4bFm0Y?OE@2^hic==]BZ:afn4Fo<]lROoRa<`=YMgDjhgb2A@5h?dhfKenc\616M64>jLh>_cHTX3jmWd<O0Zl>I6h
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19242
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: 2011-11-29T18:08:46+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 29.11.11 17:34, Natasha Kerensikova wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On 2011-11-29, Pascal Obry <pascal@obry.net> wrote:
>> Do you have some speed/memory comparison between your Chunked_String and
>> GNAT Unbounded_String?
> 
> Not yet, but I would love to eventually have it. I'm mostly missing a
> proper benchmark protocol, and any input on that point would be
> appreciated.

The package GNAT.Spitbol.Patterns uses Unbounded_String extensively.
Last time I checked it seemed possible to replace the dependence
on Ada.Strings.Unbounded with one on a compatible package.
The very first definition in GNAT.Spitbol is

   subtype VString is Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Unbounded_String;

It should be sufficient to change this definition and

   Nul : VString renames Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Null_Unbounded_String;

to use your strings, in local copies of the sources of the
GNAT.Spitbol hierarchy.

Of particular interest might be, I think, anything that can improve
replacement in objects of type Unbounded_String.

One program whose performance depends a lot on replacement
in Unbounded_String is
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32q/program.php?test=regexdna&lang=gnat&id=1

The bencher software they use to measure relative performance of the
programs is fairly easy to install on GNU/Linux. The "read-only"
part of the above program is really fast, the replacements, however,
aren't. The critical part is in the function Match:


      -- Perform the regex substitution.  Likely facing
      --
      -- (1a) the GREAT BIG subtstitution problem
      --      (cf. D.W.E. Blatt, 1980)
      -- (1b) replacements in Unbounded_String which
      --      the pattern matching implementation is using
      while I <= Limit loop
         for C in Codes_Index loop
            while
               Match(Subject => Sequence_Lines(I),
                     Pat => Codes(C).Code,
                     Replace => Codes(C).Alternatives)
            loop
               null;
            end loop;
         end loop;
         I := I + Step;
      end loop;

Maybe you find some idea in there to be useful for testing.