On 6 August 2012 21:03, Jacob Nordfalk <[email protected]> wrote: > A workaround would be to split the code up in several methods. > However, I think we first should look if the rule could be simplified or > something. as 64 thousand bytecode instructuions probably means the rule > contains over 5000-10000 comparisons and invocations, which I'd is way too > much
I've replaced ~10,000 lines of rules with one 20 line macro - that's only maybe 20% of what can be deleted from those two rules, but they seem to build without error now. -- <Sefam> Are any of the mentors around? <jimregan> yes, they're the ones trolling you ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
