On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > Ah yes, I didn't think of that. But the size of _Executor is fixed, > isn't it? If it has a huge number of states or matches those will be > on the heap anyway, in vectors/arrays. > > It could be huge if instantiated with a huge iterator type, as it > stores three members of the iterator type, but I don't think users > should be too surprised if they overflow the stack with freakishly > large iterators :-) > > Am I still missing something? > > (I don't have a preference for whether to change this, but if we keep > it on the heap we should add a comment, or I'll keep forgetting the > rationale and try to change it again!)
Either way is OK, in fact. Let's just keep the code simple by applying this patch. I can't imagine one could use nested lookahead. :) -- Regards, Tim Shen
