Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: WPS tokenizer
Re: WPS tokenizer
From: XavierGr <xaviergr_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 00:53:19 +0200
On 18/03/07, RaeNye <raenye_at_netvision.net.il> wrote:
> >So I'm finally ready to present a patch for the WPS tokenizer.
> >The basic idea is to store the WPS as an array of tokens.
> >Please tell me what you think of the concept and the code.
> >IMHO this has the advantage of being much clearer, readable and
> maintainable than the current code.
> >As of performance, I don't have the confirmation that it's faster, but I
> think it should be, as it was designed
> >to make the parser do all the work. Binsize isa bit of a disappointment.
> thought it could be smaller,
> >but instead I'm seeing a (small) increase on some targets (I haven't done
> much checking, though).
> I haven't yet looked at the code, but I think we could parse the WPS in a
> preprocessor plugin
> (don't call it a WPS compiler, it sounds intimidating), creating some
> "bytecode" that would be interpreted by the WPS viewer
> (really don't call it a WPS-VM, that's just sick).
> We can surely save core size as well as CPU cycles.
> All this can be made in a user-transparent way by having the preprocessing
> done by a viewer plugin, caching the result with a WPS timestamp/filehash
> save future work.
> The real question is whether we can come up with a platform independent
> intermediate representation that captures all current (and hopefully
> WPS aspects).
> My 2 cents,
I don't know exactly the details of your proposal, but I wouldn't like to
see core features of Rockbox (like the WPS) downgraded to plugins. What
about TSR plugins that run in the background?
Received on 2007-03-18