significantly different.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mark Johnson
Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2005 7:15 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
Has anyone tested my reported D3 best method
A(5).
My 1 cent.
- Original Message -
From: Piers Angliss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 8:51 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
Not that it seems to matter these days but both this method and the ..-1
notation (which
-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 10:11 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
My results were different. Substring assignment is very fast, but not as
fast as -1 and CONVERT.
***
* substring assignment
***
STIME = TIME()
ITEM = SPACE(99
I believe MCD. I'll test the next time I visit this client.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 9:02 AM
Subject: RE: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
Which platforms don't support system(11)?
-Original
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 11:28 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
As promised, here are the results of 9 different methods of appending.
Basically program went
a virtual
memory issue like years (decades) ago.
Thanks.
- Original Message -
From: Dzevad Dizdar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
Hi Mark,
There is another fast method to consider
, August 22, 2005 05:27
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
Hi Mark,
There is another fast method to consider
A=
FOR I=1 TO 5
IF A = THEN
A := I
END ELSE
A := @VM : I
END
NEXT I
It will take less then 1 second to finish on our system
Which platforms don't support system(11)?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dzevad Dizdar
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 12:27 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
Hi Mark
Note that Mark is reporting results from D3.
A=
FOR I=1 TO 5
A1,-1=I
NEXT I
Style 2: -1 attribute level then CONVERT to
253...41 seconds
UniVerse caches the last-accessed field position in a dynamic array. On my
1.7 GHz pentium laptop,
0001: A =
My results were different. Substring assignment is very fast, but not as
fast as -1 and CONVERT.
***
* substring assignment
***
STIME = TIME()
ITEM = SPACE(99)
PTR = 0
FOR J = 1 TO 5
L = LEN(J)+1
ITEM[1+PTR,L] = J:@VM
PTR += L
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Johnson
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2005 11:28 AM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
As promised, here are the results of 9 different methods of appending.
Basically program went like this:
A=
FOR I=1 TO 5
Hey, the evaluation of various methods is great, it would be even
greater if the folks doing the evaluating would let us know what sort
of hardware. One poster mentioned a laptop, that's good info. The
original guy mentions a production system that is in use, that's good
too. But, it would be
, August 21, 2005 9:27 PM
To: u2-users@listserver.u2ug.org
Subject: Re: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
Hi Mark,
There is another fast method to consider
A=
FOR I=1 TO 5
IF A = THEN
A := I
END ELSE
A := @VM : I
END
NEXT I
It will take less then 1 second to finish on our system
As promised, here are the results of 9 different methods of appending.
Basically program went like this:
A=
FOR I=1 TO 5
A1,-1=I
NEXT I
Style 1: 1,-1
straight...1 minute, 29
seconds
Style 2: -1 attribute level then CONVERT to
: Sunday, August 21, 2005 12:27 PM
Subject: [U2] REMOVE results as promised.
As promised, here are the results of 9 different methods of appending.
Basically program went like this:
A=
FOR I=1 TO 5
A1,-1=I
NEXT I
Style 1: 1,-1
straight
15 matches
Mail list logo
