Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tuning branch retains previous parse trees. #14

Closed
postmodern opened this issue Jan 18, 2011 · 4 comments
Closed

Tuning branch retains previous parse trees. #14

postmodern opened this issue Jan 18, 2011 · 4 comments

Comments

@postmodern
Copy link
Contributor

I noticed that the results from previous parsing, stays within the parser object.

parser.logical_and_expression.parse('1 && 2')
 => {:binary_and=>{:left=>{:constant=>"1 "}, :right=>{:constant=>"2"}}} 
parser.logical_and_expression.parse('1 && 3')
 => {:binary_and=>{:left=>{:constant=>"1 "}, :right=>{:constant=>"2"}}} 
@kschiess
Copy link
Owner

I know. The tuning branch is kind of a development/hacking branch and as such only a preview on upcoming worlds of execution speed. It has certainly got serious issues (code quality is low for now), but this is the only real bug that I know of.

Fixing this requires a partial rewrite that I am undergoing right now. Please be patient; If you want working code, use the gem or master.

Alternatively, dont reuse your parsers for now, at least not with the tuning branch...

Apropos: I find it curious that we cannot indicate which branch a ticket is about except by writing it in the text...

@postmodern
Copy link
Contributor Author

OK, will hold off until later.

You should make a Label for "tuning".

@postmodern
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also, the performance on master / 1.0.x is so horrible, it makes parsing the most basic C expression take close to 1 minute. This lead me to test the tuning branch; which is incredibly fast!

@kschiess
Copy link
Owner

This has been fixed in the current HEAD of tuning. I have now a regression that prevents this from happening.

This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants