Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: regex vs hash
From: Zach Bennett <BennettMan () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 09:35:48 -0400
I would imagine it's time vs space trade off. A hashtable would be quicker, but would require memory for your Hash table to actually exist. A regexp would need no memory, but would take more time. On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:02:54 +0300, upb <upbupb () gmail com> wrote:
heh, what kind of question is that, hash tables partition the data into smaller tables that can be indexed by the hash of the string, so you need to do only a few dereferences and maybe some compares if you got collisions. afaik a regexp needs to process every entry atleast once. On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:20:39 -0600, Michael Gale <michael.gale () bluesuperman com> wrote:Hello, I am trying to figure out what would be faster to look up, a regexp or hash table. If both files had a the same amount of data in them which one would be faster ?? Lets for example 10,000 lines ??? Michael. _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
Current thread:
- regex vs hash Michael Gale (Oct 22)
- Re: regex vs hash upb (Oct 22)
- Re: regex vs hash Zach Bennett (Oct 22)
- Re: regex vs hash upb (Oct 22)