Hi On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 19:05:25 +0100 Albert Astals Cid <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I implemented the KMP search algorithm in [1] but I feel it doesn't > > get attention. Please apply [2] and test it. > > You sent a mail yesterday and already complain you are being ignored? No, I added the patch the day before, and since only 3 adresses are notified about it, I thought it would be worth mentioning on the mailing list aswell. > > [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8821 > > [2] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=36255 > > > > To be honest, the gain is small; > > If the gain is small i'd prefer to stay with our tested code than to > switch to something totally new. I understand where you're coming from; I've seen a improvement of factor 3 for certain cases, and I've never seen a lower speed compared to the naive implementation. It shows that the factors of O(n*m) are comparable to the factors of the new O(n). So it has a gain. I tested the KMP code with several instances before integrating it into poppler, and afterwards using the glib-demo program. The code is not "totally new" in the sense that KMP is old, and I kept to implementations I found on the web. The change [1] is small (~10 lines changed plus two new functions), although the additional indentation level makes it look bigger. https://bugs.freedesktop.org/review?bug=8821&attachment=36292 So, yes, I think it should go in. > > I find it odd that the search > > function is page-based and runs per block (sorry, I'm new to > > poppler). It strikes me that no wrapped words can ever be found.
pgpP1E7OFGff4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ poppler mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
