If you compare to Norvig's first corrector you should also compare to the much faster http://norvig.com/ngrams (which follows an algorithm I sent him).
Added: I'd guess the newer Norvig corrector is still slower, though it is more accurate (taking into account probabilities of different typos). There's a curiosity not mentioned in his article, that the new algorithm computes a very slightly different set of candidates. I only noticed the difference when I got around to checking these sets against each other for all the words in a sample document -- I'd meant them to be the same. Might be fun to check the OP's code this way too.
Comments
If you compare to Norvig's first corrector you should also compare to the much faster http://norvig.com/ngrams (which follows an algorithm I sent him).
Added: I'd guess the newer Norvig corrector is still slower, though it is more accurate (taking into account probabilities of different typos). There's a curiosity not mentioned in his article, that the new algorithm computes a very slightly different set of candidates. I only noticed the difference when I got around to checking these sets against each other for all the words in a sample document -- I'd meant them to be the same. Might be fun to check the OP's code this way too.