Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:25:49 +1000 From: Peter Jeremy <PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> Cc: Jeremie Le Hen <jeremie@le-hen.org> Subject: Re: strcspn(3) complexity improvement Message-ID: <20050331112549.GI71384@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20050330183145.GB24465@odin.ac.hmc.edu> References: <20050330083435.GI75546@obiwan.tataz.chchile.org> <20050330110613.GB71384@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> <20050330183145.GB24465@odin.ac.hmc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2005-Mar-30 10:31:45 -0800, Brooks Davis wrote: >The real question I have is, how long does the string need to be before >this is a win and how much does it hurt for typical string lengths? >I've written code with strcspn that needed to perform well, but it was >parsing 80-column punch card derived formats. I was thinking about this last night. The easy way is to generate random "string" and "charset" arrays of varying length and time both strcspn() variants - this gives you two two-dimensional surfaces showing timing vs argument size. The difficulty is visualising the result and deciding whether pairs of random strings are realistic. -- Peter Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050331112549.GI71384>