+static const char correct_alpha[] = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz"
+ "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ"
+ "_"; /* TODO: Numbers ... */
+
+static const size_t correct_alpha_index[0x80] = {
+ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
+ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
+ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
+ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,
+ 0, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,
+ 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 0, 0, 0, 0, 52,
+ 0, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40,
+ 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
+};
+
+/*
+ * A fast space efficent trie for a dictionary of identifiers. This is
+ * faster than a hashtable for one reason. A hashtable itself may have
+ * fast constant lookup time, but the hash itself must be very fast. We
+ * have one of the fastest hash functions for strings, but if you do a
+ * lost of hashing (which we do, almost 3 million hashes per identifier)
+ * a hashtable becomes slow.
+ */
+correct_trie_t* correct_trie_new() {
+ correct_trie_t *t = (correct_trie_t*)mem_a(sizeof(correct_trie_t));
+ t->value = NULL;
+ t->entries = NULL;
+ return t;
+}