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=none 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 0EDB4BC0A for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:55:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de (einhorn.in-berlin.de [192.109.42.8]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l2HJtIW0016828 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:55:18 +0100 X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de X-Envelope-To: Received: from first (dslb-088-073-122-198.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.73.122.198]) (authenticated bits=0) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id l2HJtHfm032709 for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:55:17 +0100 Received: by first (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0BDBF38EE8D; Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:55:15 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 20:55:15 +0100 From: Oliver Bandel To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Case-insensitive lexing Message-ID: <20070317195515.GA5232@first.in-berlin.de> References: <23E977DC-77FF-44A2-8675-5EAA8F61505F@gmail.com> <200702232300.08359.jon@ffconsultancy.com> <200702240032.19129.jon@ffconsultancy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200702240032.19129.jon@ffconsultancy.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8 X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 45FC47A6.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bandel:01 in-berlin:01 lexing:01 ocaml:01 equality:01 wrote:01 wrote:01 oliver:01 oliver:01 caml-list:01 strings:01 strings:01 linear:02 string:02 seems:03 On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 12:32:18AM +0000, Jon Harrop wrote: > 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? [...] => Feature-wish in Ocaml-Bug-Tracker? Ciao, Oliver