On Wed, Jan 16, 2002 at 01:30:42AM -0800, Brent Dax wrote: > The attached patch adds a new stack type that only handles INTVALs. > These are much more efficient than generic stacks--on Win32 they shave a > few ten-thousandths of a second off each run of the rx_popindex op, and > take a full hundredth of a second off the benchmark. It also shows > performance improvements on BSD. They also take up less memory. All > tests pass on both platforms; one warning is removed (as a side effect > of the modified interface for regex stacks) and no new ones are > introduced.
Why call them rxStacks if they're just stacks of INTVALs? Why not intStack or something? I can see them being useful in other code too.
