> Do you have plans on doing tests > on runtime efficiency, i.e. how fast it is to run the automata on texts? > One thing that we found with flag diacritics on lexc is is that it's > kindof possible to abuse them to optimise the compiled stuff and it'd > probably be interesting to see here too, I see there's something with > flags in the code already?
It can compile with or without flag diacritics, though the flag mode was mostly an afterthought and I haven't really tested it yet. For non-flag runtimes, the transducers should be the same as lexc + twoc, apart from alignment differences (a:b c:0 vs a:0 c:b) and state numbers, so I assumed it would have the same performance, but maybe I should double check. On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 12:00 PM Tommi A Pirinen < [email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 02, 2020 at 09:46:19PM -0500, Daniel Swanson wrote: > > > I was recently experimenting with alternative ways of compiling analyzers > > for languages with prefixes and I've come up with something that produces > > results equivalent to using path restriction rules but compiles > > substantially faster (up to 600x for Navajo and Lingala). > > That seems interesting, I was thinking of a similar thing back when we > were "reverse engineering" lexc, but actually never had the time to > implement it. I haven't tested it much beyond the > included tests but it seems promising. Do you have plans on doing tests > on runtime efficiency, i.e. how fast it is to run the automata on texts? > One thing that we found with flag diacritics on lexc is is that it's > kindof possible to abuse them to optimise the compiled stuff and it'd > probably be interesting to see here too, I see there's something with > flags in the code already? > > > > I'm interested in any feedback on the syntax or anything else that might > > make this more useful to people. > > Well, I have two self-contradicting opinions of lexc-like syntaxes versus > XMLs. On the other hand I think most of XML usages just look unappealing > and wrong, but if I need to teach the stuff, having XML for all of the > components is probably easier than collection of slightly > differing text formats. But anyways, the format seems good and clean, > and I like it how things end up looking like linguistic explanation of > the morphotactics with named patterns and all. > > Cool stuff, it'd be interesting to see something like this in standard > language packages > -- > Doktor Tommi A Pirinen, Computational Linguist, > <https://flammie.github.io/purplemonkeydishwasher/>, Universität > Hamburg, Hamburger Zentrum für Sprachkorpora <http://hzsk.de>. CLARIN-D > Entwickler. President of ACL SIGUR SIG for Uralic languages > <http://gtweb.uit.no/sigur/>. > I tend to follow inline-posting style in desktop e-mail messages. > _______________________________________________ > Apertium-stuff mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff >
_______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
