On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 00:24 -0400, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
you really know how to rub it in there rob. but i was looking at the
implementation in the php code, looks like somebody likes my idea
(this code
found in ext/standard/string.c). on the second line the haystack is
converted to lower
sorry to bother you richard.
You didn't, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't losing it (more).
--
Richard Heyes
++
| Access SSH with a Windows mapped drive |
|http://www.phpguru.org/sftpdrive|
++
--
PHP
Hi,
and the case insensitive versions are a hair faster still ;)
Are they? I always thought that case-sensitive functions were faster
because they have to test fewer comparisons. Eg To test if i == I in a
case-insensitive fashion requires two comparisons (i == I and i == i)
whereas a
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Richard Heyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
and the case insensitive versions are a hair faster still ;)
Are they? I always thought that case-sensitive functions were faster
because they have to test fewer comparisons. Eg To test if i == I in a
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:18 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Richard Heyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
and the case insensitive versions are a hair faster still ;)
Are they? I always thought that case-sensitive functions were faster
because they have
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Nope, case insensitive is slower since you must make two tests for
characters having a lower and upper case version. With case sensitive
comparisons you only need to make a single comparison.
a quick test shows stripos
I can't find any good reason for regex in this case.
you can try to split it with explode / stristr / create a function by your
own which goes over the string and check when a @ is catched, something
like:
function GetDomainName ($a)
{
$returnDomain = ;
$beigale = false;
for ($i = 0; $i
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:56 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Nope, case insensitive is slower since you must make two tests for
characters having a lower and upper case version. With case sensitive
comparisons you only
at least he have some humer ;-)
On 04/06/2008, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:56 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Nope, case insensitive is slower since you must make two tests for
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Did you just try to use a test that used a single iteration to prove me
wrong? OMFG ponies!!! Loop each one of those 10 million times, use a
separate script for each, and use the system time program to
appropriately
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 13:12 -0400, Robert Cummings wrote:
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 10:56 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Nope, case insensitive is slower since you must make two tests for
characters having a lower and
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 11:18 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Did you just try to use a test that used a single iteration to prove me
wrong? OMFG ponies!!! Loop each one of those 10 million times, use a
separate script
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 11:18 -0600, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Did you just try to use a test that used a single iteration to prove me
wrong?
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 23:20 -0400, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
i repeated your test using the time program and splitting the script into 2,
one for each strpos and stripos, to find similar results. imo, there is no
need for 2 comparisons for case-insensitive searches, because both arguments
can be
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Robert Cummings [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 23:20 -0400, Nathan Nobbe wrote:
i repeated your test using the time program and splitting the script into
2,
one for each strpos and stripos, to find similar results. imo, there is
no
need
You can use this:
$str = '[EMAIL PROTECTED]';
preg_match('/[EMAIL PROTECTED]@(.+)/', $str, $matches);
var_dump($matches);//will be in $matches[1]
Or without regex:
echo substr($str, strpos($str, '@')+1);
Liran
- Original Message -
From: VamVan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 8:39 PM, VamVan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All,
For example I have these email addressess -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
What would be my PHP function[Regular expression[ to that can give me some
thing like
yahoo.com
hotmail.com
17 matches
Mail list logo
