zsh-workers
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
To: "Zsh Hackers' List" <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Slow parsing of large array assignments
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2015 18:20:12 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <150208182012.ZM14199@torch.brasslantern.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <150208122744.ZM5447@torch.brasslantern.com>

On Feb 8, 12:27pm, Bart Schaefer wrote:
}
} The slowdown here appears to be with compiling the source'd file into
} the internal wordcode format before executing it.  Even dumping the
} whole assignment as a single string and then using "eval" on that, is
} faster than allowing "source" to parse the words directly.  We may
} want to dig further into why that is the case.

The "slow" routine is parse.c:par_nl_wordlist(), which calls zshlex()
repeatedly [once for every word in the array].  This is slower when
reading from a file than when reading from a string in memory, which
explains the difference between "source" and "eval" for me.

It's also a lot slower than bufferwords(), which implements the (z)
flag for parameter splitting.

Finally, par_nl_wordlist() in the current revision of zsh seems to take
longer than in 4.2.0 or 5.0.7 for the same input.

Over 10 runs I get these average times sourcing a file that assigns
approximately 55000 words to an array:

zsh 4.2.0:                    3.91s
zsh-5.0.7 (release version):  4.85s
zsh-5.0.7-289-g7d15b9a:       7.47s

I believe the two zsh-5.0.7 were compiled with identical flags, though
the 5.0.7 binary is stripped; I don't know about the old 4.2.0.  If I
re-compile with -O in CFLAGS, g7d15b9a speeds up to 4.95s average.


  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-09  2:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-08 16:19 Performance of _store_cache and _retrieve_cache Daniel Hahler
2015-02-08 18:27 ` Daniel Hahler
2015-02-08 19:14 ` Bart Schaefer
2015-02-08 20:27 ` Bart Schaefer
2015-02-09  2:20   ` Bart Schaefer [this message]
2015-05-23  1:10   ` Regression with completion cache (was: Re: Performance of _store_cache and _retrieve_cache) Daniel Hahler
2015-05-27 22:10   ` Performance of _store_cache and _retrieve_cache Oliver Kiddle
2015-05-28 22:18     ` Bart Schaefer
2015-05-29 11:13       ` Peter Stephenson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=150208182012.ZM14199@torch.brasslantern.com \
    --to=schaefer@brasslantern.com \
    --cc=zsh-workers@zsh.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).