Re: Regexes in ATL 2
From: Patty O'Dors (PattyODors_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 09/14/04
- Next message: Patty O'Dors: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Previous message: Arnaud Debaene: "Re: class question"
- In reply to: Alex Blekhman: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Next in thread: Alex Blekhman: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Reply: Alex Blekhman: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 01:27:02 -0700
sounds interesting, but I get 'not authorized to view this page' when going
to that website about greta...
Thanks anyway
"Alex Blekhman" wrote:
> "Patty O'Dors" <PattyODors@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:952AE601-D42A-4873-AD63-8BC4A3DA5E03@microsoft.com...
> > (pls also see previous question about regexes)
> > Which is better, AtlRegExp or "boost" regexes? In terms of
> performance? The
> > string being operated on will be a std::basic_string<_TCHAR> (but
> can
> > obviously be converted to just a plain _TCHAR* - I've just used the
> STL for
> > strings for easy appending).
>
> If you need performance, then you should consider GRETA package from
> Microsoft:
> <http://research.microsoft.com/projects/greta/>
>
> Performance comparison can be found here:
> <http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/boost/boost/libs/regex/doc/vc71
> -performance.html?rev=1.4>
>
> Usually, if performance is important, then you should test your
> typical data set against several regexp packages, because each of them
> has its strong sides and weak sides. From my experiance, for most
> generic tasks GRETA is unbeatable. Also, it has quite neat laconic
> syntax, that I personally appreciate. GRETA is free for commercial
> use, as well.
>
> From the other hand, if regexp is not a bottleneck of your program and
> you're already using ATL, then forget about third parties, it will
> only do your life unnecessary comlicated. Use ATL classes because
> they're already there, built-in in framework and nicely integrated
> with other classes that ATL uses. ATL regexp classes has nothing to do
> with server programming per se, and can be used in any code without
> any problem. They have decent set of features that covers most of
> generic needs. I use them all the time when speed is not highest
> priority. Also, ATL's regexp should work for you without CRT/STL, as
> well. It can be important for lightweight components.
>
> What about boost's regexp, I have rather traumatic experience with
> that library. It's simply huge, unjustifiably huge. It takes forever
> to compile, it's complicated to configure and incorporate into
> existing project and usage is very cumbersome (for me, at least).
> GRETA, in contrast with it, is really tiny package that consists of
> only six files (three of them are headers). ATL's classes don't even
> require any additional files, they're already in the library. When I
> tried boost it was real PITA to build it and to bind to existing code.
> I didn't like boost for all of this. However, it's my personal
> opinion.
>
> HTH
> Alex
>
>
>
- Next message: Patty O'Dors: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Previous message: Arnaud Debaene: "Re: class question"
- In reply to: Alex Blekhman: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Next in thread: Alex Blekhman: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Reply: Alex Blekhman: "Re: Regexes in ATL 2"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
