From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30F6BC6E for ; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 01:38:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from ptb-relay01.plus.net (ptb-relay01.plus.net [212.159.14.212]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l1O0ce7b009901 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 01:38:40 +0100 Received: from [80.229.56.224] (helo=beast.local) by ptb-relay01.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1HKkvv-0005lu-Cd for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Sat, 24 Feb 2007 00:38:39 +0000 From: Jon Harrop Organization: Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Case-insensitive lexing Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 00:32:18 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <23E977DC-77FF-44A2-8675-5EAA8F61505F@gmail.com> <200702232300.08359.jon@ffconsultancy.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200702240032.19129.jon@ffconsultancy.com> X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 45DF8910.001 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; lexing:01 ocaml:01 ocaml:01 frog:98 equality:01 wrote:01 caml-list:01 strings:01 strings:01 linear:02 string:02 seems:03 seems:03 dispatch:03 pattern:04 On Friday 23 February 2007 23:39, you wrote: > Because, at least what I think, comparing strings using a hash-table is way > faster than comparing them using pattern-matching. I had always assumed that OCaml would build an optimal dispatch table when pattern matching over strings but it seems you are quite right: it does the worst possible linear string equality tests, not even O(log n) comparisons. That seems like a great shame to me. Can someone implement this? -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. OCaml for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists