-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
What is the expected performance overhead of using nom_locate
?
#89
Comments
nom_locate
?
Thanks for the benchmark. with roughly a quarter in
I'd love to hear feedback from other users of the crate, though. |
Hey! Quick feedback, I've been using this lib recently to implement a json parser and overall it was working well until I tried to parse canada.json. The file is quite small: My implementation is way different than |
Hi,
I wrote a parser using nom which was capable of parsing ~100 Mb/s of beancount syntax on my machine.
After introducing
nom_locate
by changing all input types from&str
toLocatedSpan<&str>
(you can look at the diff),the parser performance has been halved, parsing only ~50 Mb/s of beancount syntax on the same machine.
It is no biggie. I was of course expecting a performance cost (as there is more work being done), and the performance is still largely acceptable (and still faster than pest). But, I was nevertheless surprised by the magnitude of the performance hit. I did not expect
nom_locate
to take half of the parsing time.So, I am just asking, is what I observe expected? Have you observed a similar performance hit in your usages of
nom_locate
? Could it be that I am misusingnom_locate
?Again, this is not an issue. But as the "discussions" are disabled, I don't know how else to open a discussion on the subject.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: