From: "Mauricio Fernández" <batsman.geo@...>
Date: 2002-08-29T02:41:44+09:00
Subject: Re: ANN: RJudy-0.1 - Judy Arrays for Ruby

On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 09:04:01PM +0900, Christoph wrote:
> "Mauricio Fern�ndez"  wrote in,
> ....
> > I later found some bugs in my plug-in replacement for Hash. I have
> > another patch which apparently fixes everything. It passes the same
> > tests JudyHash does and some others, as st_* is used for everything and
> > Ruby seems to run fine now.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I am very curious (and running windows so no judy yet) how this
> replacement effect pure method lookup time?  Keeping it
> simple, what are the Fibonacci and Ackerman benchmarks?

It isn't faster _yet_ wrt method lookup, but keep in mind I've written it
in ~3-4 hours and have made *no* attempt whatsoever to optimize it...

I can think of some ways to speed up method lookup using Judy:
 * use JudySL for this, as ASCIIZ is good enough
   -> the hashing function for methods becomes void
 * use tricks to discriminate between Judy arrays and st_table_entry
   structs, like the Fixnum / pointer business.

-- 
 _           _                             
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \ 
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
	Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com
  
...and scantily clad females, of course.  Who cares if it's below zero
outside.
	-- Linus Torvalds