Let's stop parser Hell

[Roman D. Boiko]

On Saturday, 7 July 2012 at 10:05:30 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> I can tell you that they are not slower then one another in 
> principle. Quality of implementations trumps every theoretical 
> aspect here. LALR is usually fast even if implemented by book 
> but they are hard to optimize futher and quite restrictive on 
> "semantic extensions".
>
> Proper CFG parsers all are liner-time anyway.

Exactly, that is also my point. I think that Pegged can be 
heavily optimized in performance, and there are no fundamental 
issues which would make it inherently slower than LALR or a 
hand-written D-specific parser.