On 7/17/08, Miles Bader <miles.bader@necel.com> wrote:
>
> "Lennart Borgman" <lennart.borgman@gmail.com> writes:
> >> If you want to reject matches that extend past some point, just do
> >> something like:
> >>
> >>   (and (looking-at REGEXP) (<= (match-end 0) BOUND))
> >
> > Thanks Miles,
> >
> > Yes, that is one possibility. But then perhaps I would assume that
> > re-search-forward better might optimize that search since it can (in
> theory)
> > cut off the searching at BOUND. In the case I am looking at performance
> is
> > important.
>
> Why don't you time it?


Because I thought someone here knew more about the performance differences
(if any). I am also a bit surprised that looking-at does not have a BOUND
parameter and hoped to get some comments on that.

But otherwise it is of course a good suggestion to time it.