On 25 May 2012 08:28, Zac Medico <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I expect that reading and validating the cache is probably not going to
> be much faster than just parsing the eclasses over again.
Unless, you don't care if the cache is out-dated because the cache is
optional / the syntax checking is optional, and its only made
available when you generate it manually.
And considering how fast eclasses change, I doubt you'd need to
regenerate it often. Though how much time it takes to parse and stuff
really needs to be properly benched, its more that there is an
intermediate state that can be inspected by human eyes instead of a
lot of magic going on
perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3,
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );"