On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 19:52:57 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
> Is there a plan to make BitNFA back?

Yes, the moment we have CTFE that doesn't leak.

> Is possible that newCTFE will improve problem with memory?

It should but it doesn't support classes and exceptions. I need them.

> Or it is possible to improve those slow cases?

There are many other things but BitNFA is a nobrainer - all the work has been already done and it is super fast where applicable.

---
Dmitry Olshansky

Hmm. I have tested old version od dmd and ldc with BitNFA, but it does not help much with those two cases

actual version of ldc:

240.964 - 92
211.433 - 5301
6.76683 - 5

ldc 1.2:
215.158 - 92
190.255 - 5301
6.58155 - 5

So there is some improvments but not as much as I would expected.

On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 6:54 AM, Dmitry Olshansky via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Tuesday, 19 September 2017 at 19:52:57 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>
>> Is there a plan to make BitNFA back?
>>
>
> Yes, the moment we have CTFE that doesn't leak.
>
> Is possible that newCTFE will improve problem with memory?
>>
>
> It should but it doesn't support classes and exceptions. I need them.
>
> Or it is possible to improve those slow cases?
>>
>
> There are many other things but BitNFA is a nobrainer - all the work has been already done and it is super fast where applicable.
>
> ---
> Dmitry Olshansky
>
>

On Wednesday, 20 September 2017 at 10:29:45 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
> Hmm. I have tested old version od dmd and ldc with BitNFA, but it does not help much with those two cases
>
> actual version of ldc:
>
> 240.964 - 92
> 211.433 - 5301
> 6.76683 - 5
>
> ldc 1.2:
> 215.158 - 92
> 190.255 - 5301
> 6.58155 - 5
>
> So there is some improvments but not as much as I would expected.

I'm going to test BitNFA myself but for the curious, the phobos branch is:
https://github.com/DmitryOlshansky/phobos/tree/ctfe-bitnfa?files=1

>> ---
>> Dmitry Olshansky