Top
Best
New

Posted by rbanffy 4 days ago

When Compilers Disagree About UTF‑8(nemanjatrifunovic.substack.com)
40 points | 6 comments
MiroslavPokorny 5 hours ago|
Title is misleading, the compilers do not disagree, running the compiled code produces the same output. The difference is one binary(instructions) are slightly different...
kstenerud 4 days ago|
You could actually use SIMD instructions to detect sequences of bytes with the top bit cleared, thus allowing bulk copies of ASCII text without a per-byte loop.

Another optimization would be to take advantage of the fact that codepoint usage tends to cluster around the language of the text. So if you detect usage of 3-byte encodings, chances are you'll continue encountering only 3-byte encodings, with the odd ASCII or emoji codepoints. This opens up even more state machine possibilities.

duskwuff 9 hours ago||
> So if you detect usage of 3-byte encodings, chances are you'll continue encountering only 3-byte encodings, with the odd ASCII or emoji codepoints.

Depends on what kind of text you're processing. Many languages use the ASCII range for spaces/newlines, digits, and punctuation.

mort96 9 hours ago||
That, plus markup, be it something XML/HTML-like or something Markdown-like.
vlovich123 7 hours ago|||
FWIW I believe the second optimization is at odds with the first. It’s really hard to do this kind of conditional historical check in SIMD.
zX41ZdbW 8 hours ago||
This is one of the optimizations from ClickHouse - detect ASCII and go a fast path: https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickHouse/blob/6cde32de1a2463...