Re: Announcing regex-tre-0.66 and benchmarks

Chris Kuklewicz wrote:

Your question has prompted me to go back into my PosixRE wrapping code and compare it to the PCRE code. I have made some changes which ought to enhance the performance of the PosixRE code. Let us see the new bechmarks on 10^6 bytes:

PosixRE (102363,["bcdcd","cdc"],["bbccd","bcc"])

real 1m35.429s user 1m17.862s sys 0m1.455s

total is 79.317s

PCRE (102363,["bcdcd","cdc"],["bbccd","bcc"])

real 0m2.570s user 0m1.702s sys 0m0.219s

total is 1.921s

So I still don't understand why PCRE should be 40 times faster than PosixRE. Surely this can't be just due to differences in the underlying C library? Cheers, Simon