Hi Thierry,
I might have missed it but did you publish your Regex2 to the list?
Pete
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 12:07 PM Richard Gaskin
wrote:
> Thierry Douez write:
>
> >> Regex has been around a long time
> >> and lots of smart computer science types has
> >> spent time coming up with ways to o
Thierry Douez write:
Regex has been around a long time
and lots of smart computer science types has
spent time coming up with ways to optimize its performance for pattern
matching.
That's was true, it's still true and will always be true!
It's true that there are almost always ways to imp
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:53 AM Bernard Devlin wrote:
> One of the things we had in LC5 which was phenomenally fast, was searching
> through the styledText of a field. That fast way of searching particular
> text structures got lost in the migration to LC8.
Could you expand on this a little? I'm
There's huge differences in how regex implementations perform in different
> languages. For example: http://raid6.com.au/~onlyjob/posts/arena/
>
Last year, I did some experiments:
I had a 100 lines of LiveCode with a bunch of really big Regex.
It took 120 seconds on my Macbook to run.
I tried
On 03/02/2016 11:53, Bernard Devlin wrote:
Perl outperforms everything in that test. I've never assumed that LC's
"perl compatiable regex library" is going to perform at the speed which
actual Perl performs. I've always assumed that being "perl compatible" just
meant that all syntactically-correc
Hi Mark,
There's huge differences in how regex implementations perform in different
languages. For example: http://raid6.com.au/~onlyjob/posts/arena/
Perl outperforms everything in that test. I've never assumed that LC's
"perl compatiable regex library" is going to perform at the speed which
actu
> Regex has been around a long time
> and lots of smart computer science types has
> spent time coming up with ways to optimize its performance for pattern
> matching.
That's was true, it's still true and will always be true!
and here are some benchmarks
done in a late rainy sunday evening
Paul Dupuis wrote:
> Wow. I would not have expected such a significant difference. Regex
> has been around a long time and lots of smart computer science types
> has spent time coming up with ways to optimize its performance for
> pattern matching. I assumed (falsely) that regex based filters in L
On 01/30/2016 04:28 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
1) wondering if LC's hooks to whatever regex tool they are using under
the hood is a good as it should be
LC's regex library is the same PCRE library everyone else uses. And it's
the latest released version. Regex's power lies in its ability to match
Wow. I would not have expected such a significant difference. Regex has
been around a long time and lots of smart computer science types has
spent time coming up with ways to optimize its performance for pattern
matching. I assumed (falsely) that regex based filters in LC would be on
par or even su
Regex is wonderfully compact to write relative to equivalent routines
using chunk expressions, but sometimes paid for in execution time.
When I come across a good regex example like the one you provided, if I
have a moment I like to test things out to see where regex is faster and
where it isn
Never mind. Solved it.
It was the pattern for the 2nd format. Fixed with
"(.+\t"&pPage&",\d+,\d+,\d+)|(.+\t\d+,\d+,"&pPage&",\d+)|(.+\t"&pPage&",\d*\.?\d*,\d*\.?\d*,\d*\.?\d*,\d*\.?\d*)"
On 1/30/2016 3:17 PM, Paul Dupuis wrote:
> I need some regex help.
>
> I have a list that is of the form:
>
>
I need some regex help.
I have a list that is of the form:
i.e.
1Testing1,7471,1,1,747
2Testing752,18001,752,1,1800
3Testing5398,58462,320,2,768
4Testing3,111.951,683.915,302.268,385.751
3,111.951,683.915,302.268,385.751
can have a list of number i
13 matches
Mail list logo