From d2a3f2cedd7c00d0933222aed9c06b3149aa4db4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: =?UTF-8?q?Lo=C3=AFc=20Hoguin?=
Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:13:37 +0200
Subject: Cowboy 2.3.0
---
articles/erlang-validate-utf8/index.html | 20 ++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
(limited to 'articles/erlang-validate-utf8')
diff --git a/articles/erlang-validate-utf8/index.html b/articles/erlang-validate-utf8/index.html
index f8efb617..87e6830d 100644
--- a/articles/erlang-validate-utf8/index.html
+++ b/articles/erlang-validate-utf8/index.html
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
-
+
Nine Nines: Validating UTF-8 binaries with Erlang
@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ algorithm named Flexible
and Economical UTF-8 Decoder. This is the C99
implementation:
-
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ calculate the next state. Then, the only thing we needed to be careful
about was that tuples are 1-based, and that we need to stop processing
the binary when we get the state 1 or when the binary is empty.
-
@@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ and State
. And by write I mean generate.
the tuple
?UTF8D
with its 400 elements, and then ran the
following expression (after a bit of trial and error):
-
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ find a way to reduce its size.
clause at the end instead reduced the number to about 500, and
showed that many clauses were similar:
-
@@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ http://www.gnu.org/software/src-highlite -->
validate_utf8(<< 7, Rest/bits >>, 0) -> validate_utf8(Rest, 0);
-
@@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ smaller equivalents, testing that performance was not impacted, and
comitting the result.
The patterns above can be found here in the resulting function:
-
@@ -268,6 +268,10 @@ http://www.gnu.org/software/src-highlite -->
+ - Cowboy 2.3
+
+
+
- Cowboy 2.2
--
cgit v1.2.3