Re^9: Common Perl Pitfalls

Oh, sure. And I don't give a damn about the difference in compilation speed of trivial small regexes.

But when the regexes get large, and difference of compiling the patterns is a few seconds vs a few minutes, I do care.

But still, even in your simple example, it's three compilations + two stringifications vs a single compile.

Here's a benchmark, 1 compilation vs 12 compilations and 20 stringifications:

use Benchmark 'cmpthese';

cmpthese -1, {
    qq =>  'my $p = qq{a}; $p = qq{$p$p} for 1 .. 10; qr/$p/',        
    qr =>  'my $p = qr{a}; $p = qr{$p$p} for 1 .. 10; qr/$p/',        
};
__END__
       Rate     qr     qq
qr    914/s     --  -100%
qq 283880/s 30949%     --
[download]

That's with 5.15.9 (on OSX). With 5.12.3 (same box), I get:

       Rate     qr     qq
qr    857/s     --  -100%
qq 324588/s 37769%     --
[download]

And, for kicks, with 5.8.9 (again, same box):

       Rate     qr     qq
qr    508/s     --  -100%
qq 301810/s 59290%     --
[download]

The resulting patterns, while identical, also differ significantly in size: the one build with repeated qr constructs is 19 times the size of the one build with qq.

I'm usually not a stickler for speed. But I make an exception when it comes to qr.

Comment on Re^9: Common Perl Pitfalls Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: Common Perl Pitfalls by Jenda (Abbot) on Apr 11, 2012 at 22:48 UTC
But if done right it's 1 compilation versus 12 compilations and 20 stringifications over the whole runtime of the script! According to the first of your benchmarks about 1 millisecond of difference. Huge deal indeed! If your regexes grow way too big, do whatever you must. Under normal conditions the difference in negligible, while the fact that I don't have to worry whether I'm writing a regexp or a single quoted string that will eventually happen to be part of a regexp is not. Even though or rather just because the difference is slight and changes the behaviour rarely. Jenda Enoch was right! Enjoy the last years of Rome.	[reply]
Re^11: Common Perl Pitfalls by JavaFan (Canon) on Apr 11, 2012 at 23:36 UTC
For me, it's the other way around. For the majority of the (sub)patterns (even with most uses of backslashes), it doesn't matter whether you write `q{PAT}` or `qr{PAT}` (it's the same keystrokes inside the braces). Meaning, there's absolutely nada difference in readability. Why go for the expensive solution? If your pattern grows, at what moment do you revisit your program, and chop off the `r` in `qr`? It's not that I never use `qr`. Sometimes, there's a (sub)pattern that's more readable as `qr` than as `q`. And sometimes, one does want a first class regexp construct. But those are the exceptions. Do note that using `q` building blocks to build your patterns gives you more flexibility than limiting yourself to just `qr`: `my $vowels = 'aeiou'; my $odds = '13579'; my $odd_or_vowel = '[$vowels$odds]';` [download] To write that as `qr`, you'd have to write something like: `my $vowels = qr/[aeiou]/; my $odds = qr/[13579]/; my $odd_or_vowel = qr/$vowels\|$odds/;` [download] which, while matching the same language, throws off the optimizer, and makes not only for a slower compilation, the match itself is slower.	[reply] [d/l] [select]


Just another Perl shrine
	PerlMonks