From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2917 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2000 09:45:03 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 14 Feb 2000 09:45:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 27652 invoked by alias); 14 Feb 2000 09:44:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 9708 Received: (qmail 27644 invoked from network); 14 Feb 2000 09:44:51 -0000 Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2000 10:44:50 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <200002140944.KAA09412@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: Peter Stephenson's message of Sun, 13 Feb 2000 18:43:06 +0000 Subject: Re: PATCH: 3.1.6-dev-18 AIX dependency fixes Peter Stephenson wrote: > ... > > There are other things --- for example, I suspect getting and setting of > parameters internally needs a complete rethink --- but it's unrealistic to > put a timetable on them. Having done quite a bit of testing lately, I'd say: yes. It's currently the slowest part of the shell, and used quite often. > Since completion now appears to be pretty much stable, 4.0.1 could then > appear without too many user-visible changes. However, I think the > wordcode stuff is going to continue to evolve anyway (rewrite parser to > eliminate the old-style structs altogether, aim to eliminate > HEAPALLOC/PERMALLOC by passing allocation strategy directly to appropriate > constructors), and I don't think it would be a good idea to produce 4.0.1 > with the current hybrid state, though it won't matter for 3.1.7. Well, I've written: a) a parser that immediatly produces the wordcode (still recursive), b) a non-recursive execution code c) several optimisations. Unfortunately, b) doesn't seem to make things faster and probably less easy to read (I've only tested this on a Intel/Linux box yet, it may be different on other machines). And, unfortunately, I overwrote the patch for a) alone, so now I have it only for a) and c) together. I'll try to separate them again, but I don't know when I'll find the time. And none of these needs to be in 3.1.7, of course. Bye Sven P.S.: c) is quite good, almost 30% faster than before. -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de