On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 06:05:29PM +0100, Bjorn Reese wrote: > Daniel Veillard wrote: > > > Hum, unfortunately this looks like a different problem, it seems > > to take a lot of cycles and I'm afraid there is something serious going > > on and that can be only studied and fixed by debugging the generated > > automata. > > reducing the expression and the input to provide a minimal automata > > showing the problem is a good first step. > > Place the following two lines in a file, and run testRegexp on it: > > =>((a[0-9]+|b[0-9]+)c) > b12345678901234567890123
thanks a lot of an even simpler test case, allowed me to nail it down while in the train yesterday, > If you add more digits to the second line, it will slow down even > further at what looks like an exponential rate. yes, a serious problem when building regexp automata, I chased it yesterday in the train, found and fixed it. I'm just surprized it didn't break way more things, commited in revision 3705. I suggest rerunning your regression tests if possible as this is really a core change, i think it's safe, but need to be heavilly tested, Daniel -- Red Hat Virtualization group http://redhat.com/virtualization/ Daniel Veillard | virtualization library http://libvirt.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | libxml GNOME XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ _______________________________________________ xml mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xml
