status of split join in pharo

>
> Hi Folks,
>
> What's the status of split and join?
>
> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>
> I need them for a project and since they are not there yet, I have
> gone back to RubyShards.
>
> http://squeaksource.com/RubyShards/
>
> Keith, do you think this can be integrated into Pharo already, or does
> it need some work still?
>
> (I think our implementation is not particularly efficient, but it
> should be serviceable.)
>
> Cheers,
> - on
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>
> Hi Folks,
>
> What's the status of split and join?
>
> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>
> I need them for a project and since they are not there yet, I have
> gone back to RubyShards.
>
> http://squeaksource.com/RubyShards/
>
> Keith, do you think this can be integrated into Pharo already, or does
> it need some work still?
>
> (I think our implementation is not particularly efficient, but it
> should be serviceable.)
>
> Cheers,
> - on
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> oscar
>
> it would be nice to see if the implementation make also sense in
> presence of other collection.
> I do not have the time to check but if a group of people can check and
> report this will
> help us to take a decision.
> I would like to have split and join in general because this is a cool
> abstraction.
> Stef
>
> On Apr 5, 2009, at 9:51 AM, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> What's the status of split and join?
>>
>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>
>> I need them for a project and since they are not there yet, I have
>> gone back to RubyShards.
>>
>> http://squeaksource.com/RubyShards/
>>
>> Keith, do you think this can be integrated into Pharo already, or  
>> does
>> it need some work still?
>>
>> (I think our implementation is not particularly efficient, but it
>> should be serviceable.)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - on
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

> I checked the code and it looks nice
>
> Now I found
>
> split: regexString
> self assert: regexString size > 0 description: 'Cannot split on empty
> regex'.
> ^regexString asRegex split: self
>
> and assert: expects a block.
> for the test
>
> testSplit
> self assert: (eg split: 'the') size = 4. self assert: (eg split: 't\w
> +e') size = 5. self assert: (eg split: 'hello') size = 1.
> it would be nice to have also an assert showing the result and not
> just its size
>
>
> then I have a question what splitBy: returns?
> does it return a collection that is the same kind of the receiver?
> Why do you hard code an OrderedCollection in splitBySubCollection:
> aSplitter.
>  self species would do it too?
> Syef
>
>
> On Apr 5, 2009, at 9:51 AM, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> What's the status of split and join?
>>
>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>
>> I need them for a project and since they are not there yet, I have
>> gone back to RubyShards.
>>
>> http://squeaksource.com/RubyShards/
>>
>> Keith, do you think this can be integrated into Pharo already, or  
>> does
>> it need some work still?
>>
>> (I think our implementation is not particularly efficient, but it
>> should be serviceable.)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - on
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

> Hi Stef,
>
> Object>>assert: also works with Boolean args, just like  
> TestCase>>assert:
>
> Does it make any difference?
>
> I cannot find the testSplit method you mention.  I am looking at  
> RubyShards-on.6.mcz
>
> Am I looking in the wrong place?  I think Keith has written some more  
> tests (according to Mantis).  Are they part of Keith's tests?
>
> I think Damien Pollet (cdlm) write splitBy:
>
> I suggest we rename the package SplitJoin.
>
> But I want to know who is charge first -- is it Keith, or Damien, or  
> Stef (or me)?  I do not want to step on anyone's toes.
>
> Cheers,
> - on
>  

>>
> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on mantis
>
> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>
> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is  
> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page discussion/
> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation that  
> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>
> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use species  
> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).

>
>
> Keith
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on mantis
>>
>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>
>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is  
>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page discussion/
>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation that  
>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>
>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use species  
>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>    
>
> or class
> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of the  
> receiver
>  
>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he didnt  
>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>    
>
> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by oscar  
> rubyshards
>
>  

> If I
> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby  
> shards in
> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>
> Keith
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on mantis
>>>
>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>>
>>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is
>>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page discussion/
>>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation that
>>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>>
>>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use species
>>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>>
>>
>> or class
>> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of the
>> receiver
>>
>>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he didnt
>>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>>
>>
>> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by oscar
>> rubyshards
>>
>>
> Which appears to me to be the opposite of what Oscar suggested. If I
> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby  
> shards in
> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>
> Keith
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>
> Hi Keith,
>
> Now I see there are attached files in Mantis.  But they all seem to
> date from 2006, whereas your latest comments are  from Jan 2009.  Are
> there more recent files from 2009 that I should look at?  If so, where
> are they?
>
> What is the best way to proceed?  Shall  I create a Join project on
> SqueakSource, and if it is updated, post the latest version on Mantis
> too?
>
> Cheers,
> - on
>
> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:08, Keith Hodges wrote:
>
>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on mantis
>>>>
>>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>>>
>>>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is
>>>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page discussion/
>>>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation  
>>>> that
>>>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>>>
>>>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use species
>>>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>>>
>>>
>>> or class
>>> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of the
>>> receiver
>>>
>>>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he didnt
>>>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by oscar
>>> rubyshards
>>>
>>>
>> Which appears to me to be the opposite of what Oscar suggested. If I
>> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
>> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby
>> shards in
>> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>>
>> Keith
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> OK, I had a closer look.
>
> Keith's implementation is completely different from, and pre-dates,
> that of Damien and myself.
>
> Keith's version works for SequenceableCollections, and uses a sequence
> to split a sequence.
>
> Ours is more tailored towards Strings, and uses a regex to split a
> String.
>
> Perhaps we can consider a merge in which sequences can be split using
> sequences, and Strings can additionally be split using regexes.
>
> We should also take efficiency into account.  I did not run any
> benchmarks yet to compare the implementations
>
> Who is interested in merging these two?
>
> Cheers,
> - on
>
> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:25, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Keith,
>>
>> Now I see there are attached files in Mantis.  But they all seem to
>> date from 2006, whereas your latest comments are  from Jan 2009.  Are
>> there more recent files from 2009 that I should look at?  If so,  
>> where
>> are they?
>>
>> What is the best way to proceed?  Shall  I create a Join project on
>> SqueakSource, and if it is updated, post the latest version on Mantis
>> too?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - on
>>
>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:08, Keith Hodges wrote:
>>
>>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on mantis
>>>>>
>>>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>>>>
>>>>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is
>>>>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page  
>>>>> discussion/
>>>>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation
>>>>> that
>>>>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>>>>
>>>>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use species
>>>>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> or class
>>>> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of the
>>>> receiver
>>>>
>>>>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he  
>>>>> didnt
>>>>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by oscar
>>>> rubyshards
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Which appears to me to be the opposite of what Oscar suggested. If I
>>> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
>>> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby
>>> shards in
>>> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>>>
>>> Keith
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> I would be in favor to have a nice oo solution :)
> I do not know what means "uses a sequence  to split a sequence."
>
> Stef
>
>> OK, I had a closer look.
>>
>> Keith's implementation is completely different from, and pre-dates,
>> that of Damien and myself.
>>
>> Keith's version works for SequenceableCollections, and uses a  
>> sequence
>> to split a sequence.
>>
>> Ours is more tailored towards Strings, and uses a regex to split a
>> String.
>>
>> Perhaps we can consider a merge in which sequences can be split using
>> sequences, and Strings can additionally be split using regexes.
>>
>> We should also take efficiency into account.  I did not run any
>> benchmarks yet to compare the implementations
>>
>> Who is interested in merging these two?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - on
>>
>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:25, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi Keith,
>>>
>>> Now I see there are attached files in Mantis.  But they all seem to
>>> date from 2006, whereas your latest comments are  from Jan 2009.  
>>> Are
>>> there more recent files from 2009 that I should look at?  If so,
>>> where
>>> are they?
>>>
>>> What is the best way to proceed?  Shall  I create a Join project on
>>> SqueakSource, and if it is updated, post the latest version on  
>>> Mantis
>>> too?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> - on
>>>
>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:08, Keith Hodges wrote:
>>>
>>>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>>>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on mantis
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is
>>>>>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page
>>>>>> discussion/
>>>>>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use species
>>>>>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> or class
>>>>> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of  
>>>>> the
>>>>> receiver
>>>>>
>>>>>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he
>>>>>> didnt
>>>>>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by  
>>>>> oscar
>>>>> rubyshards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Which appears to me to be the opposite of what Oscar suggested.  
>>>> If I
>>>> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
>>>> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby
>>>> shards in
>>>> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>>>>
>>>> Keith
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>
> With Keith's version you can do this:
>
> #(1 10 11 2 10 11 3 10 11 4) splitOn: #(10 11)
>
> I was assuming that the thing we use to split was a regex string.
>
> 'hello there' split: '\s'
>
> Actually I see that Damien added this possibility in RubyShards as
> well.  This also works:
>
> #(1 10 11 2 10 11 3 10 11 4) split: #(10 11)
>
> It seems that RubyShards is more general, but we need to take a closer
> look at both solutions.  The interfaces are not the same.  There may
> be differences in performance.
>
> - on
>
>
> On Apr 5, 2009, at 17:47, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>
>> I would be in favor to have a nice oo solution :)
>> I do not know what means "uses a sequence  to split a sequence."
>>
>> Stef
>>
>>> OK, I had a closer look.
>>>
>>> Keith's implementation is completely different from, and pre-dates,
>>> that of Damien and myself.
>>>
>>> Keith's version works for SequenceableCollections, and uses a
>>> sequence
>>> to split a sequence.
>>>
>>> Ours is more tailored towards Strings, and uses a regex to split a
>>> String.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we can consider a merge in which sequences can be split  
>>> using
>>> sequences, and Strings can additionally be split using regexes.
>>>
>>> We should also take efficiency into account.  I did not run any
>>> benchmarks yet to compare the implementations
>>>
>>> Who is interested in merging these two?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> - on
>>>
>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:25, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Keith,
>>>>
>>>> Now I see there are attached files in Mantis.  But they all seem to
>>>> date from 2006, whereas your latest comments are  from Jan 2009.
>>>> Are
>>>> there more recent files from 2009 that I should look at?  If so,
>>>> where
>>>> are they?
>>>>
>>>> What is the best way to proceed?  Shall  I create a Join project on
>>>> SqueakSource, and if it is updated, post the latest version on
>>>> Mantis
>>>> too?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> - on
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:08, Keith Hodges wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>>>>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on  
>>>>>>> mantis
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is
>>>>>>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page
>>>>>>> discussion/
>>>>>>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use  
>>>>>>> species
>>>>>>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or class
>>>>>> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> receiver
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he
>>>>>>> didnt
>>>>>>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by
>>>>>> oscar
>>>>>> rubyshards
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Which appears to me to be the opposite of what Oscar suggested.
>>>>> If I
>>>>> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
>>>>> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby
>>>>> shards in
>>>>> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>>>>>
>>>>> Keith
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- 
>>>>> project
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>
> About performance:
>
> I just did a quick experiment in the pier migration application where
> I need split and join.
>
> I use split and join to remove comments from HTMl files.  I ran the
> tests without removing comments, and removing them using the two
> different split/join implementations.
>
> Keith's sequence splitter is blindingly fast, imposing no discernable
> overhead, whereas my regex version slows all the tests down by 100%!
>
> I would still like to have splitting on regexes, but it should
> probably not be the default for strings.  Maybe we can improve the
> implementation and speed it up ...
>
> - on
>
> On Apr 5, 2009, at 18:03, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>
>>
>> With Keith's version you can do this:
>>
>> #(1 10 11 2 10 11 3 10 11 4) splitOn: #(10 11)
>>
>> I was assuming that the thing we use to split was a regex string.
>>
>> 'hello there' split: '\s'
>>
>> Actually I see that Damien added this possibility in RubyShards as
>> well.  This also works:
>>
>> #(1 10 11 2 10 11 3 10 11 4) split: #(10 11)
>>
>> It seems that RubyShards is more general, but we need to take a  
>> closer
>> look at both solutions.  The interfaces are not the same.  There may
>> be differences in performance.
>>
>> - on
>>
>>
>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 17:47, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>
>>> I would be in favor to have a nice oo solution :)
>>> I do not know what means "uses a sequence  to split a sequence."
>>>
>>> Stef
>>>
>>>> OK, I had a closer look.
>>>>
>>>> Keith's implementation is completely different from, and pre-dates,
>>>> that of Damien and myself.
>>>>
>>>> Keith's version works for SequenceableCollections, and uses a
>>>> sequence
>>>> to split a sequence.
>>>>
>>>> Ours is more tailored towards Strings, and uses a regex to split a
>>>> String.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we can consider a merge in which sequences can be split
>>>> using
>>>> sequences, and Strings can additionally be split using regexes.
>>>>
>>>> We should also take efficiency into account.  I did not run any
>>>> benchmarks yet to compare the implementations
>>>>
>>>> Who is interested in merging these two?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> - on
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:25, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Keith,
>>>>>
>>>>> Now I see there are attached files in Mantis.  But they all seem  
>>>>> to
>>>>> date from 2006, whereas your latest comments are  from Jan 2009.
>>>>> Are
>>>>> there more recent files from 2009 that I should look at?  If so,
>>>>> where
>>>>> are they?
>>>>>
>>>>> What is the best way to proceed?  Shall  I create a Join project  
>>>>> on
>>>>> SqueakSource, and if it is updated, post the latest version on
>>>>> Mantis
>>>>> too?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> - on
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:08, Keith Hodges wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>>>>>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on
>>>>>>>> mantis
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is
>>>>>>>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page
>>>>>>>> discussion/
>>>>>>>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished implementation
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use
>>>>>>>> species
>>>>>>>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> or class
>>>>>>> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> receiver
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he
>>>>>>>> didnt
>>>>>>>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by
>>>>>>> oscar
>>>>>>> rubyshards
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Which appears to me to be the opposite of what Oscar suggested.
>>>>>> If I
>>>>>> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
>>>>>> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby
>>>>>> shards in
>>>>>> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-
>>>>>> project
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- 
>>>>> project
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>
> Oops. I made a mistake in the experiment.  There is actually less
> difference than I thought.
>
> Here we load a web site, optionally using split and join to remove all
> comments.  My regex version seems to be only marginally worse than
> Keith's sequence splitting.
>
>
> 5289 "ON split on regex"
> 5327
>
> 5165 "KH split on sequence"
> 5160
>
> 2153 "no splitting"
> 2160
>
> So regex splitting seems to be feasible.
>
> I can try to have a closer look and propose a merged solution, but
> right now my plate is rather full.
>
> - on
>
>
> On Apr 5, 2009, at 18:14, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>
>>
>> About performance:
>>
>> I just did a quick experiment in the pier migration application where
>> I need split and join.
>>
>> I use split and join to remove comments from HTMl files.  I ran the
>> tests without removing comments, and removing them using the two
>> different split/join implementations.
>>
>> Keith's sequence splitter is blindingly fast, imposing no discernable
>> overhead, whereas my regex version slows all the tests down by 100%!
>>
>> I would still like to have splitting on regexes, but it should
>> probably not be the default for strings.  Maybe we can improve the
>> implementation and speed it up ...
>>
>> - on
>>
>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 18:03, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> With Keith's version you can do this:
>>>
>>> #(1 10 11 2 10 11 3 10 11 4) splitOn: #(10 11)
>>>
>>> I was assuming that the thing we use to split was a regex string.
>>>
>>> 'hello there' split: '\s'
>>>
>>> Actually I see that Damien added this possibility in RubyShards as
>>> well.  This also works:
>>>
>>> #(1 10 11 2 10 11 3 10 11 4) split: #(10 11)
>>>
>>> It seems that RubyShards is more general, but we need to take a
>>> closer
>>> look at both solutions.  The interfaces are not the same.  There may
>>> be differences in performance.
>>>
>>> - on
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 17:47, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would be in favor to have a nice oo solution :)
>>>> I do not know what means "uses a sequence  to split a sequence."
>>>>
>>>> Stef
>>>>
>>>>> OK, I had a closer look.
>>>>>
>>>>> Keith's implementation is completely different from, and pre-
>>>>> dates,
>>>>> that of Damien and myself.
>>>>>
>>>>> Keith's version works for SequenceableCollections, and uses a
>>>>> sequence
>>>>> to split a sequence.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ours is more tailored towards Strings, and uses a regex to split a
>>>>> String.
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps we can consider a merge in which sequences can be split
>>>>> using
>>>>> sequences, and Strings can additionally be split using regexes.
>>>>>
>>>>> We should also take efficiency into account.  I did not run any
>>>>> benchmarks yet to compare the implementations
>>>>>
>>>>> Who is interested in merging these two?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> - on
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:25, Oscar Nierstrasz wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Keith,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now I see there are attached files in Mantis.  But they all seem
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> date from 2006, whereas your latest comments are  from Jan 2009.
>>>>>> Are
>>>>>> there more recent files from 2009 that I should look at?  If so,
>>>>>> where
>>>>>> are they?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What is the best way to proceed?  Shall  I create a Join project
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> SqueakSource, and if it is updated, post the latest version on
>>>>>> Mantis
>>>>>> too?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> - on
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 5, 2009, at 16:08, Keith Hodges wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I wrote the split join implementation that is available on
>>>>>>>>> mantis
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=4874
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I use it all the time, if you would like to improve on what is
>>>>>>>>> there, please continue to contribute to the mantis page
>>>>>>>>> discussion/
>>>>>>>>> tests and code. That way we will get an polished  
>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> can be added to squeak or to pharo.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The suggestion to use #species would be fine (I never use
>>>>>>>>> species
>>>>>>>>> myself, because I dont understand what its really for).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> or class
>>>>>>>> the point is that you get back a collection of the same kind of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> receiver
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When stef says "I have checked the code and it looks nice" he
>>>>>>>>> didnt
>>>>>>>>> say which code he checked, so I am confused.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I looked at the latest version in the repository mentioned by
>>>>>>>> oscar
>>>>>>>> rubyshards
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which appears to me to be the opposite of what Oscar suggested.
>>>>>>> If I
>>>>>>> read the email, he asked what the status of mantis 4874 was,
>>>>>>> anticipating that it be integrated. He had "gone back" to ruby
>>>>>>> shards in
>>>>>>> the absense of the integration of 4784.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Keith
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-
>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-
>>>>>> project
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>>> [hidden email]
>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- 
>>>>> project
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
> Kind regards,
> Oscar Nierstrasz
> ---
> Prof. Dr. O. Nierstrasz    -- [hidden email]
> Software Composition Group -- http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~scg
> University of Bern         -- Tel/Fax +41 31 631.4618/3355
> vcard:  http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~oscar/oscarNierstrasz.vcf
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> Oops. I made a mistake in the experiment.  There is actually less  
> difference than I thought.
>
> Here we load a web site, optionally using split and join to remove all  
> comments.  My regex version seems to be only marginally worse than  
> Keith's sequence splitting.
>
>
> 5289 "ON split on regex"
> 5327
>
> 5165 "KH split on sequence"
> 5160
>
> 2153 "no splitting"
> 2160
>
> So regex splitting seems to be feasible.
>