[REBOL] Re: UTF-8 revisited
From: rotenca:telvia:it at: 27-Nov-2002 21:40
While the first set of changes reduces the timings to about 65%
What is exactly the first?
the second has much lesser impact - 61% at best, which is about
And the second?
0.34s for 1000 loops on "chars: ìsèøzýáíé" Latin-1 sequence (case k=1)
where utf8-encode gets its best timing of 0.18.
But if you try utf8-encode with a long string (>6000 chars), it becomes more
slow than encode. What is the most frequent case?
But breaking of the 1s barrier happened only after I completely revised
the algorithm and started working from the least significant bits up.
This way I could get rid of most of the tables and use hardcoded
magic "64" integer instead.
This is a smart approach. Thanks for info on your work.