Programming-Language-Benchmark VS cl-ppcre

I found Zig implementation of json parsing is interesting. The code is free from hidden control flow !.

https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark...

It appears helloworld is the only test with any repeats, and it only has 5 repeats. https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark...

Here's the measurement code, it appears to be significantly more complicated than a simple fork/exec/wait loop but that could just be all the C# getting in the way: https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark... Nevertheless you are probably right that the bulk of this 1.8ms is in the executable under test, and it truly is just bloat. Running `hyperfine ./empty-main-function` from rustc on my Mac gives 0.8ms.

Is faster... on code that has been optimized to hell and back 5 times over and no longer resembles anything like normal code written in the language.

Seriously, this is the code for the top program. I'm reasonably sure 99% of C++ programmers could not decipher it without spending significant amounts of time on google: https://github.com/hanabi1224/Programming-Language-Benchmark...

I appreciate that fair benchmarks across languages are a hard problem, but this is not a good solution to it. Any reference to this data as a comparison between "programming languages and compilers" needs to come with a giant disclaimer that it's comparing them at something you almost certainly don't use them for, and is very far from their main use case.

I also appreciate that this is a repetitive comment the likes of which always come up when this benchmark is mentioned... but I really don't see another way to avoid people misinterpreting it. Very few people are going to spontaneously click through to the code.

I've never used cl-ppcre myself, but its docs[1] claim that it provides compile-time regexes:

> CL-PPCRE uses compiler macros to pre-compile scanners at load time if possible. This happens if the compiler can determine that the regular expression (no matter if it's a string or an S-expression) is constant at compile time and is intended to save the time for creating scanners at execution time (probably creating the same scanner over and over in a loop).

[1]: https://edicl.github.io/cl-ppcre/

A few weeks back Xach recommended cl-ppcre which i found educational.

For simple string processing, there are some functions in the language, that you can find listed here (for string-specific functions) and here (for more generic sequence-handling functions). For anything involving regular expressions, cl-ppcre is the way, in particular the split and register-groups-bind functions.

I must have a serious bug in my writing about this, because this was never about regex engines -- it's about literals and domain-specific sublanguages in general. Composing DSL programs by string concatenation is such a famous source of security bugs you see it in top-10 lists. I linked to the very similar example of a PEG parsing DSL.

But any regex engine that can work with a parse tree shows the same principle, e.g. https://edicl.github.io/cl-ppcre/#create-scanner2

Take a look at - https://github.com/edicl/cl-ppcre

And here's what I believe represents the reality of the situation... Stas was indeed tired of ASDF's changes. Now the nature of what changes to make is a matter of judgement of course, but in this case (I'm thinking of SBCL's bug report request to update ASDF: https://bugs.launchpad.net/sbcl/+bug/1826074), it would be a different matter altogether if the discussion was centered on how best to make the new ASDF work with SBCL, but the thread reads to me like a man who had to put up with too much breakage for the upteenth time. Now, if (for the sake of argument :D) the change was of the necessary kind -- think hardware changes or security issues -- I can still see myself feeling wronged, it's human to do so. Because I don't trust ASDF anymore or I feel as if they (or other people at each step of the process) have not shared enough of the burden. But from the discussions I have read (https://github.com/edicl/cl-ppcre/pull/30) what the ASDF maintainers want to change does not seem unreasonable and they are willing to share the burden. But let us say it's truly a 50/50 deadlock. Well then Linus is right, show us the code, who dares wins. And Stas certainly has enough on his plate. But that's why we must cooperate. You don't have to be a diplomat to know the difference when two people want to work together and when one party wants out. And this setting makes more sense when you read (https://bugs.launchpad.net/sbcl/+bug/1823442) where Stas honestly states he wants nothing more to do with ASDF. I don't think it's unreasonable to surmise there's a bit more going on here than plainly technical issues.

Could you just direct me to some existing discussions, in order to save time? I already read this one.

I plan to use the regular expressions with a cl-ppcre wrapper, also emulating various clojure regular expression operations. Similar to re21, which doesn't quite support the operations in the way I'd like (or match the clojure operations), and whose regular expression literal syntax is "#//".