both of these approaches use NFAs under the hood, which means O(m * n) matching. our approach is fundamentally different: we encode lookaround information directly in the automaton via derivatives, which gives us O(n) matching with a small constant. the trade-off is that we restrict lookarounds to a normalized form (?<=R1)R2(?=R3) where R1/R2/R3 themselves don’t contain lookarounds. the oracle-based approaches support more general nesting, but pay for it in the matching loop. one open question i have is how they handle memory for the oracle table - if you read a gigabyte of text, do you keep a gigabyte-sized table in memory for each lookaround in the pattern?
На Украине объяснили рост влияния одного политика фразой «как ребенок»14:46，详情可参考同城约会
Елена Торубарова (Редактор отдела «Россия»)，详情可参考Line官方版本下载
Великобритания собралась защитить свою военную базу от Ирана14:46，推荐阅读体育直播获取更多信息
17-летнюю дочь Николь Кидман высмеяли в сети за нелепую походку на модном показе20:47