On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 02:18:26PM -0400, Alexander R. Pruss wrote:
> Nah, please don't wait. I don't think I'll do the 68k stuff in the near
> future. My feeling is that the interest in the search code is low, and for
> low-interest stuff, I only code things that I need myself. :-)
OK. here it
From: "Adam McDaniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 07:49:21PM +0200, Michael Nordstrom wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 06, 2003, Alexander R. Pruss wrote:
> >
> > > But I don't know if anybody but other than me cares about the search
speed.
> >
> > Speed is great, so if the search function
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 07:49:21PM +0200, Michael Nordstrom wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2003, Alexander R. Pruss wrote:
>
> > But I don't know if anybody but other than me cares about the search speed.
>
> Speed is great, so if the search function can be split up in a
> "maintainable" way I would li
On Fri, Jun 06, 2003, Alexander R. Pruss wrote:
> But I don't know if anybody but other than me cares about the search speed.
Speed is great, so if the search function can be split up in a
"maintainable" way I would like to see the code.
/Mike
___
plu
The current search routine is designed to work with multi-byte alphabets.
When experimenting with my search armlet, I found that the multi-byte
alphabet support slows down the search by a significant amount. Switching
from multi-byte to single-byte sped up my benchmark from 2 or 2.5 min (it
was a
I wonder if the fonts in Plucker wouldn't do well to be spun-off into
separate prc's. This would let the user substitute a different font pack
(e.g., for a non-Latin script, or just a nicer font pack), as well as save
memory (no need for hi-res users to have the lo-res fonts, and vice
versa). Any
