> Thanks a lot, by the way! > > I've just skimmed through the code and the README... You did not use the > packed forest representation, did you..?
Sorry for the microscopic documentation (Pegged is more documented than that...), it was a 'for me only' project. The forest is packed, in the sense that common nodes are re-used and shared among parse trees: all intermediate parse results from any grammar part is stored and used to produce the parse nodes. The range view gives access to parse trees one after another, but the global parse forest is present in the grammar object (or rather, generated and completed during the parse process: each new parse result completes the parse forest). It has a strange effect on parsing times repartition among the parse results: If you time the different parse trees, you'll see that the first one might take maybe 40% of the entire parsing time all by itself, because it has to discover all parse results alone. The following trees are very rapidly calculated, since the intermediate parse results are already known. Of course, once the parse trees begin to deviate from the first ones, the process slows down again since they have to explore as-yet-unused rules and input slices. I'm not sure the previous paragraph is clear... Imagine you have 10 different parse trees. They could be disributed like this: # parse result % global parse time 1 40% 2 2 3 3 4 3 5 5 6 6 7 8 8 10 9 11 10 12
