Steve Spicklemire wrote:
Makes sense to me! I'm guessing eval was used since it's a little simpler not to have to keep track of both the string expression and the compiled expression.. but that's just a guess. However it does
Crap... just noticed that the eval()'d version does compile() the expression and caches it. That shoots that optimization... time for more profiling.
bring up a point I've been wondering about anyway. Now that Ty and Phillip have moved on to TransWarp, who will be maintaining all the changes to ZPatterns? SteveA has done a great job of keeping a modified version available for folks running 2.3.X, but I've seen no motion to move those changes into the "real" ZPatterns. Now if you find a great optimization, will it get movedinto ZPatterns too? There are a number of folks now whove contributed to the 'ZPatterns' project and have invested significant effort in projects that are based on ZPatterns, and would like to see it maintained. (me!) I wonder if there is some way that stewardship for ZPatterns could be either 'handed off' or 'shared' so that these kinds of things can be kept up-to-date without delaying the promised TransWarp goodies.
What do you think?
I've been thinking something similar since hearing about TW. If Phillip and Ty no longer want to maintain ZPatterns perhaps we could get a little group to keep it up-to-date and tweak it. I'd be interested and I'm sure my company would pay me to help do this (we use ZPatterns extensively). -- John Eikenberry [jae@kavi.com] ______________________________________________________________ "A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will deserve neither and lose both." --B. Franklin