On Saturday, 7 July 2012 at 10:05:30 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
I can tell you that they are not slower then one another in
principle. Quality of implementations trumps every theoretical
aspect here. LALR is usually fast even if implemented by book
but they are hard to optimize futher and quite restrictive on
"semantic extensions".
Proper CFG parsers all are liner-time anyway.
Exactly, that is also my point. I think that Pegged can be
heavily optimized in performance, and there are no fundamental
issues which would make it inherently slower than LALR or a
hand-written D-specific parser.
