fix(parser): greatly improve expression parsing performance #90
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
this avoids re-parsing expression terms when backtracking from a non-matching operation
this avoids re-parsing the expression term when it's not followed by a `?`
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Previously, the parser needed to do a lot of backtracking while parsing conditionals and operations which massively degraded performance for deeply nested expressions.
This fix inlines the handling for operations and conditionals into the
Expressionrule so that an already matchedExprTermrule does not need to be re-evaluated when no operation/conditional is matched (which is the case in the vast majority of cases since literal values and collections are way more common than these.Fixes #82