[antlr-interest] Re: Generated C++ Parser Performance

[cwrenniks]

Actually, I hadn't broken it down between the lexer and parser, in 
terms of processing time. We're using a generated lexer, into a 
parser, and then into a tree parser. Is there some documentation or 
archives out there that I can scan for tips to make the c++ 
generated code faster? 

Regards,

Renniks

--- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, "lgcraymer" <lgc at m...> wrote:
> When you write "parser", do you mean "language processor"?  If so, 
the
> lexer is likely to be the problem--check the flex example for an
> alternative approach.
> 
> --Loring
> 
> --- In antlr-interest at yahoogroups.com, "cwrenniks" 
<cwrenniks at a...> wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > Been doing some testing in a cross language project, generating 
my 
> > grammar in both C++ and Java. I've noticed that the Java parser 
is 
> > much faster than the C++ parser, which surprised me. We 
generated 
> > the parser over to C++ looking for more performance, and were 
bummed 
> > when it went the other way! Is this going to be corrected?
> > 
> > Cheers!
> > 
> > Renniks



 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/antlr-interest/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     antlr-interest-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/