POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.beta-test : Experimental v3.8.0-x.tokenizer.9960461 : Re: Experimental v3.8.0-x.tokenizer.9960461 Server Time
6 Dec 2021 16:43:09 EST (-0500)
  Re: Experimental v3.8.0-x.tokenizer.9960461  
From: clipka
Date: 9 Dec 2018 20:54:51
Message: <5c0dc76b$1@news.povray.org>
Am 09.12.2018 um 16:09 schrieb jr:
> hi,
> 
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> another iteration of the new parser needs thorough testing:
>> https://github.com/POV-Ray/povray/releases/tag/v3.8.0-x.tokenizer.9960461
>> Please let me know of any SDL constructs that work in the latest alpha
>> but cause this version to throw a tantrum.
> 
> it's quite a bit slower than the previous x.tokenizer version (from 5576 to 6095
> seconds for the first test), also shows a slight increase in "K tokens"
> processed for same scene.

Performance is the least of my "tactical" priorities (despite being a 
strategical goal of the whole thing).

The token count thing worries me a bit. I couldn't care less if I 
inadvertently introduced a slight change to the rules for how the number 
of tokens is counted as a side effect of some other sensible change, but 
I can't think of any recent change that might have such an effect; are 
you sure it's not simply an artifact of the way you observe this number? 
And are you sure we are talking about the same reference version 
(x-tokenizer.9945666)? If so, can you narrow down the scene language 
construct for which the values differ?

That said, the main focus of this version is on furthering my 
understanding of what's left of the legacy parser code. To that end, 
I've peppered the code with checks to verify some assumptions that may 
or may not hold true, and what I'm really interested in right now is 
reports of cases where they don't. Those should manifest as parse errors.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2021 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.