On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > To bring this on-topic for python-dev by considering how it could apply > to Python's default re engine, I think the key issue is that any updates > to the default engine would need to remain backwards compatible with all > of the tricks that re2 doesn't support. > > There are major practical problems associated with making such a leap > directly (Google's re2 engine is in C++ rather than C and we'd have to > keep the existing implementation around regardless to handle the > features that re2 doesn't support).
I don't see why C++ would be a deal-breaker in this case, since it would be restricted to an extension module. > I would say it is better to let re2 bake for a while and see if anyone > is motivated to come up with Python bindings for it and release them on > PyPI. FWIW, re2 is heavily, heavily used in production at Google. Stabilizing any proposed Python bindings would be a good idea, but I'm not sure how much more "baking" re2's core functionality needs. > Once that happens (and assuming the bindings earn a good > reputation), the first step towards integration would be to include a > "See Also" in the re module documentation to point people towards the > more limited (but more robust) regex engine implementation. > > The next step would probably be a hybrid third party library that > exploits the NFA approach when it can, but resorts to backtracking when > it has to in order to handle full regex functionality. (Although > developers would need to be able to disable the backtracking support in > order to restore re2's guarantees of linear time execution) We considered such a hybrid approach for Unladen Swallow, but rejected it on the advice of the V8 team [1]: you end up maintaining two totally separate, incompatible regex engines; the hybrid system comes with interesting, possibly unintuitive performance/correctness issues when bailing from one implementation to another; performance is unstable as small changes are made to the regexes; and it's not obvious that enough Python regexes would benefit from re2's performance/restrictions tradeoff to make such a hybrid system worthwhile in the long term. (There is no representative corpus of real-world Python regexes weighted for dynamic execution frequency to use in assessing such tradeoffs empirically like there is for JavaScript.) re2 is very useful when you want to run user-provided regexes and want to protect your backends against pathological/malicious regex input, but I'm not sure how applicable it is to Python. I think there are more promising strategies to improve regex performance, such as reusing the new JIT infrastructure to JIT-compile regular expressions to machine code (along the lines of V8's irregexp). Some work has already been done in this direction, and I'd be thrilled to mentor any GSoC students interested in working on such a project this summer. Lastly, anyone interested in working on Python regex performance should take a look at the regex benchmarks in the standard benchmark suite [2]. Thanks, Collin Winter [1] - http://blog.chromium.org/2009/02/irregexp-google-chromes-new-regexp.html#c4843826268005492354 [2] - http://hg.python.org/benchmarks/file/5b8fe389710b/performance _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
