From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Jun 25 17:26:02 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA3661065676;
	Sat, 25 Jun 2011 17:26:02 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from gabor@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from server.mypc.hu (server.mypc.hu [87.229.73.95])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 315EF8FC1B;
	Sat, 25 Jun 2011 17:26:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from server.mypc.hu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by server.mypc.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C8B614E5922;
	Sat, 25 Jun 2011 19:26:00 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at server.mypc.hu
Received: from server.mypc.hu ([127.0.0.1])
	by server.mypc.hu (server.mypc.hu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with LMTP id tQaY6ROxLlmC; Sat, 25 Jun 2011 19:25:55 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [193.137.158.200] (unknown [193.137.158.200])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by server.mypc.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D86A14E5850;
	Sat, 25 Jun 2011 19:25:55 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E061A25.2000605@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 18:25:57 +0100
From: Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; pt-PT;
	rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Chris Rees <crees@freebsd.org>
References: <4E05E7EC.9000902@FreeBSD.org>
	<BANLkTimJKySdBq5hsdce1PyzahRB7ZK+rg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimJKySdBq5hsdce1PyzahRB7ZK+rg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [CFT] patch to replace the regex code
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2011 17:26:02 -0000

> Forgive me if I'm patronizing, but is there any surprise that a POSIX 
> NFA implementation is slower than grep's DFA?
>
Oh, of course an NFA implementation will always be slightly slower but 
the memory footprint will also be smaller, which is a big advantage for 
embedded systems. But in this case, the basis of the comparison was not 
the GNU DFA implementation but the old libc-regex. At the moment, BSD 
grep in the base system uses the GNU regex engine but I built a local 
version for testing purposes that used libc-regex.

Gabor