I imagine a switch is the same speed as a hash (switches generally evaluate to a hash). Using a trie structure could be faster than regex in some circumstances I imagine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trie On Feb 3, 12:45 pm, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com> wrote: > In that case, wouldn't a switch statement have even less overhead than > creating an object to check everytime? I'd think > > switch(tag){case 'body':case 'html': /* ... */ break;} would be an > even faster solution, no? > > On Feb 3, 12:39 pm, George Adamson <george.adam...@softwareunity.com> > wrote: > > > > > Absolutely, it is very very limited. So this technique is only suited > > to the type of regex's that I quoted, like the one used internally by > > jquery to test for body or html tags only, or to test for t(able|d|h) > > only. Particulalry when used inside a loop. For parsing a selector we > > still need regex. > > > On Feb 3, 3:16 pm, Eric Garside <gars...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Using a hash I can see for some situations, but unless you can figure > > > out a way (and I'd be super interested if you could) to do complex > > > cascade parsing without regex, your method seems like double the work > > > of rewriting with no benefits towards maintainability and a minor > > > speed increase for only certain tags.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
