From: "Mauricio Fernández" Date: 2002-08-27T02:11:38+09:00 Subject: Re: Ruby and Judy On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 03:46:27PM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote: > Hi, > > In message "Re: Ruby and Judy" > on 02/08/26, dougbaskins@frii.com writes: > > |As soon as I finish, I will be interested in testing (and possibly > |tuning) JudySL for suitability inside an interpreter > |(Python/Perl/Java/Ruby/etc.). > > As Ruby's author, I am pretty interested in replacing internal hash > functions with Judy, but I need support for hash for length specified > string, since strings in Ruby can contain NUL. According to this [http://www.sourcejudy.com/application/judysl.pdf] paper, the JudySL* functions are implemented atop JudyL. This means we can duplicate JudySL to use Ruby's strings instead of ASCIIZ. This other [http://www.sourcejudy.com/application/Judy_hashing.pdf] explains how to use Judy to handle collisions chains in a hash. This way it could be integrated into the current st_* family, and the hashing functions could be simplified, as collisions would be cheaper... -- _ _ | |__ __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___ __ _ _ __ | '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \ | |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | | |_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_| Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable) batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com Absolutely nothing should be concluded from these figures except that no conclusion can be drawn from them. -- Joseph L. Brothers, Linux/PowerPC Project)