On 13 February 2012 15:19, Francis Tyers <[email protected]> wrote: >> are >> the Python and C++ implementations equivalent? how much faster is the >> VM approach compared to using apertium-{transfer, interchunk, >> postchunk}? Is the plan to have the Apertium pipeline use this VM >> approach instead? > > The C++ version is about 4-5 times slower than the normal transfer :( > > The idea is to move over to this eventually, but so far it does not > offer any performance improvements...
Bytecode was never implemented (or, at least, not fully); I think it was outside the scope of that project, because it would have taken too long. As GSoC is comping up, maybe it'd make a good project? Applications are due at the end of the month, and we haven't had the flurry of activity around project ideas that we had in previous years. -- <Sefam> Are any of the mentors around? <jimregan> yes, they're the ones trolling you ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try before you buy = See our experts in action! The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3, Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-dev2 _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
