On Tue, Jun 20, 2000 at 12:15:01PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>for the record, my little benchmark now runs about five
>times faster than before -- which means that 16-bit find
>is now ~30% faster than 8-bit find (barry? ;-)
Speculation: the code in stringobject.c looks like this:
for (; i <= last; ++i)
if (s[i] == sub[0] &&
(n == 1 || memcmp(&s[i+1], &sub[1], n-1) == 0))
return (long)i;
It checks the first character, and then does the memcmp() skipping the
first character, or succeeds if the substring length is 1; the Unicode
find is simpler, just doing the full memcmp. I wonder if the extra n
== 1 and i+1, n-1 arithmetic costs more than it saves? This is
probably delicately tied to the speed of your memcmp(). Anyone want
to try the simpler version and report on whether it makes a difference?
--amk
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4