On 26 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
From: Nix [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 20 Nov 2006, Giampaolo Tomassoni spake thusly:
That's not even mentioning the metaprogramming and higher-order
programming techniques that we use extensively in SpamAssassin -- those
are basically *just not
On 26 Nov 2006, Tom Allison uttered the following:
I could see doing something in C/C++ but definitely not Java...
Similary, for performance reasons I would stay away from Ruby.
The performance that matters for SA is the performance of the regular
expression matcher. That's the only part that
From: Nix [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 26 Nov 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] told this:
From: Nix [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 20 Nov 2006, Giampaolo Tomassoni spake thusly:
That's not even mentioning the metaprogramming and higher-order
programming techniques that we use extensively in
On 20 Nov 2006, Giampaolo Tomassoni spake thusly:
That's not even mentioning the metaprogramming and higher-order
programming techniques that we use extensively in SpamAssassin -- those
are basically *just not possible* in C/C++. ;)
Ops. What's this stuff? Let me know.
eval and all that it
From: Nix [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 20 Nov 2006, Giampaolo Tomassoni spake thusly:
That's not even mentioning the metaprogramming and higher-order
programming techniques that we use extensively in SpamAssassin -- those
are basically *just not possible* in C/C++. ;)
Ops. What's this stuff? Let me
Nix wrote:
On 20 Nov 2006, Giampaolo Tomassoni spake thusly:
That's not even mentioning the metaprogramming and higher-order
programming techniques that we use extensively in SpamAssassin -- those
are basically *just not possible* in C/C++. ;)
Ops. What's this stuff? Let me know.
eval and
Giampaolo Tomassoni writes:
Recently in the perl blead code, one of the perl hackers has
added a trie-based regexp matcher (with Aho-Corasick
optimisations) to efficiently match multiple regular expressions
in parallel, to the perl core regexp matching code. That's pretty
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
...omissis
But if we are speaking of a /10 mem*cpu factor, well, it could
easily be interesting, isn't it?
No. I think it would be patently stupid because of the massive effort
involved and loss of mind-power.
That's not even mentioning the metaprogramming and higher-order
programming techniques that we use extensively in SpamAssassin -- those
are basically *just not possible* in C/C++. ;)
--j.
Matt Kettler writes:
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mark Martinec writes:
On Friday November 17 2006 21:24, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Besides, if there wasn't SA pluging, I would prefer a C/C++ version of SA.
Wouldn't it run better? Wouldn't it be faster, wouldn't have a smaller
memory footprint, better reclamation, better hooks for
Mark Martinec wrote:
On Friday November 17 2006 21:24, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Besides, if there wasn't SA pluging, I would prefer a C/C++ version of SA.
Wouldn't it run better? Wouldn't it be faster, wouldn't have a smaller
memory footprint, better reclamation, better hooks for plugins
Am 17.11.2006 um 20:36 schrieb Eric A. Hall:
Thinking about the GPL Java announcement some, and trying to
imagine the
kinds of opportunities this allows for, it occurs to me that
SpamAssassin
might be a natural fit for Java.
Why on earth do you come to that conclusion and what does
On Saturday November 18 2006 02:05, Matt Kettler wrote:
I also expect a lot of the memory usage is the annotation tables and
such for regexes. It would be interesting to compare the size of spamd
without any rules loaded against one with a stock ruleset. The
difference between the two can't
This was with amavisd-new, but should not be much different than
spamd, except for somewhat smaller daemon main program in clamd.
s/clamd/spamd/
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1) perl has a substantial base of text parsing and utility libraries
that no other language can match.. Java does have native regex support,
so it has a leg up over the others,
Right, but both langs are not that much suited for scoring a message:
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1) perl has a substantial base of text parsing and utility libraries
that no other language can match.. Java does have native regex support,
so it has a leg up over the others,
Right, but both langs are not
Giampaolo Tomassoni writes:
From: Matt Kettler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1) perl has a substantial base of text parsing and utility libraries
that no other language can match.. Java does have native regex
support, so it has a leg up over the others,
Right, but both langs are not that
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...omissis
Recently in the perl blead code, one of the perl hackers has added a
trie-based regexp matcher (with Aho-Corasick optimisations) to efficiently
match multiple regular expressions in parallel, to the perl core regexp
matching code.
well...
I spent several years writing Java in the '90s, and am quite certain that
SpamAssassin would perform a *lot* worse if written in Java.
SpamAssassin is heavy on regular expressions, and *very* optimised for
Perl's VM.
On top of that, I'm pretty sure it would be quite hard to get
Giampaolo Tomassoni writes:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...omissis
Recently in the perl blead code, one of the perl hackers has added a
trie-based regexp matcher (with Aho-Corasick optimisations) to efficiently
match multiple regular expressions in parallel, to
On Friday November 17 2006 21:24, Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Besides, if there wasn't SA pluging, I would prefer a C/C++ version of SA.
Wouldn't it run better? Wouldn't it be faster, wouldn't have a smaller
memory footprint, better reclamation, better hooks for plugins etc? :)
...and buffer
Thinking about the GPL Java announcement some, and trying to imagine the
kinds of opportunities this allows for, it occurs to me that SpamAssassin
might be a natural fit for Java.
I'm just thinking out loud here, not advocating anything...
Would it run better? Would it be faster, have
Giampaolo Tomassoni wrote:
Thinking about the GPL Java announcement some, and trying to imagine the
kinds of opportunities this allows for, it occurs to me that SpamAssassin
might be a natural fit for Java.
I'm just thinking out loud here, not advocating anything...
Would it run better?
What
Eric A. Hall wrote:
Thinking about the GPL Java announcement some, and trying to imagine the
kinds of opportunities this allows for, it occurs to me that SpamAssassin
might be a natural fit for Java.
I'm just thinking out loud here, not advocating anything...
Would it run better? Would it
24 matches
Mail list logo
