From: Tim Pease <tim.pease@...>
Date: 2007-04-12T23:44:07+09:00
Subject: Re: memory exhausted

On 4/12/07, Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 12.04.2007 05:30, Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote:
> > At Thu, 12 Apr 2007 04:19:02 +0900,
> > Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote in [ruby-talk:247527]:
> >> A patch to inverse the order of shift/reduce.
> >
> > And for if/elsif/else.
>
> But what do we gain by this?  I haven't seen this error in years of Ruby
> (neither in my own code nor in postings here) which leads me to believe
> that it's actually not an issue in practice.  The test case seemed
> extremely artificial and I guess CASE statements of that size are quite
> a lot more inefficient than Hash lookups or other strategies.
>

Agreed. This is definitely and edge case that would only show up in
some very poor code -- mainly auto-generated stuff as shown by all the
examples. I simply wanted to figure out if it was really a lex/yacc
limit, then does it appear in other Ruby control structures.

Quite frankly I'm amazed that Nobu came up with a patch so quickly.
The lexer instills fear into my heart.

Blessings,
TwP