lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Thank you for pointing that out! You're right that it's not the only implementation: I corrected that paragraph. Still, both cases cause a drop in performance, so it's certainly something to keep noted in the article.

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Sean Conner <> wrote:
It was thus said that the Great ThePhD once stated:
> Here's the writeup of the new benchmarks and how I did it, as well as some
> (minor) insights into how someone would typically use the C API versus what
> would be the most performant way of doing it:
> I hope it helps a few people here!

  I'm reading your writeup, and I came across this:

> A few libraries here also make a curious choice: rather than making you pass
> separate null-terminated strings to dive into nested tables, it instead
> writes a tiny little parser to handle every "." that appears in the strings
> you provide. This means you can access nested tables with "a.b.c", but the
> problem becomes that it has to in-place edit the strings you pass to
> null-terminate, perform the lookup for the next ?chunk?, and then continue
> processing the string. It?s not ideal and it does incur a performance hit,
> so while super convenient to specify a path in a single string, it is not
> advisable.

  The only comment I have about this is that modification of the "path
string" is not required.  I wrote code [1] that does traverse a "path string"
without modifying the string at all [2].  Yes, this is slower than using a
simple string literal to lua_getfield() [3] so it should be avoided when you
can, but to say you have to modify the string is erroneous.

  -spc (It's just a minor detail really)


[2]     Since most, if not all, of the strings I'm passing in are C literal
        constant strings, which can't be modified (at least on the platforms
        I run on).

[3]     Or other API calls that retrieve data from a table.