On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Rey Bango <[email protected]> wrote:
> Good question, Dean. This was presented to me this weekend by someone who
> needs to work with the data as is. Not sure why but that's what they have to
> work with.
>
Oh, I'd assumed this data was mocked because of the glaring bug in the
original getChord function (the second for loop `i` clobbering the first)
that would surface immediately on a set with more than one chord nested.
> So regardless of the structure, what *I'm* personally interested in at this
> moment is helping them optimize the traversal of the data. Can you help?
>
Sure. I'd think the fastest traversal would be no traversal at all, so if
they're in a position to keep an index around it'd drastically improve
querying. Of course, if they can keep index state around they could probably
just restructure the data as per my previous email. So if they can't index
or rewrite, sadly, I don't think there's any way to get around the loops --
the best you could do is use the fastest looping technique available, a
while loop from the tail: `i=array.length; while(i--) {}`.
Here's a gist demonstrates both an index and optimized looping:
https://gist.github.com/1229524
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
