[cmake-developers] slow regex implementation in RegularExpression

[Pau Garcia i Quiles]

Hi,

If it's of any help, I used the pcrecpp library by Google (it's part
of PCRE). With pcrecpp, most operations were only 1-3 lines long. The
only problem I found is PCRE provided no way to get the previous/next
match, which CMake needs.



On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Alexandru Ciobanu
<alex at rogue-research.com> wrote:
> Hi Bill and Pau,
>
> I am currently working on adding PCRE to CMake. Chances are very hight that it will work, given the very similar comp()/exec() API calls in both implementations.
>
> I'll let you know about the results soon.
>
> Alex
>
>
> On 2011-11-14, at 10:31 PM, Bill Hoffman wrote:
>
>> On 11/14/2011 6:08 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>>> Bill,
>>>
>>> I think the current incarnation of regexps in CMake should be kept for
>>> compatibility reasons.
>>>
>> Yes, of course.
>>
>>> Adding PCRE is not difficult, just time consuming. The implementation
>>> I'd do would be an additional abstraction layer:
>>> - For the current BRE implementation, it would be a 1:1 call match
>>> - For the PCRE implementation, it would keep match status, count,
>>> next/previous iterators, etc.
>>>
>> So, for this case I would be interested to here from Alex to see if swapping out the regex will fix the ctest performance issue.  It is a nice isolated place to give PCRE a try.
>>
>> -Bill
>> --
>>
>> Powered by www.kitware.com
>>
>> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>>
>> Please keep messages on-topic and check the CMake FAQ at: http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_FAQ
>>
>> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
>> http://public.kitware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cmake-developers
>
>



-- 
Pau Garcia i Quiles
http://www.elpauer.org
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)