I wrote a couple functions that “flatten” an array into a string in such a way
that it can be converted back into an array again when done. Here they are:
function altPrintKeys @pArray, theKeyList, pFullData
put numtochar(11) into vertTab
put numtochar(30) into altCr
put the keys of
Cool function Bob, I always love a good recursive handler.
It might be broken when an array element contains more than one word. (Limited
testing tho.)
Eric
On May 4, 2015, at 2:14 PM, Bob Sneidar bobsnei...@iotecdigital.com wrote:
I wrote a couple functions that “flatten” an array into a
That is in an array key name.
Bob S
On May 4, 2015, at 14:32 , Bob Sneidar
bobsnei...@iotecdigital.commailto:bobsnei...@iotecdigital.com wrote:
That may be. I never use multiple words in an array so it would never have
occurred to me to test for that.
Bob S
That may be. I never use multiple words in an array so it would never have
occurred to me to test for that.
Bob S
On May 4, 2015, at 14:30 , Eric Corbett e...@canelasoftware.com wrote:
Cool function Bob, I always love a good recursive handler.
It might be broken when an array element
any extra commands like filter.
Thanks for caring
Tiemo
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] Im Auftrag
von Mike Bonner
Gesendet: Freitag, 24. April 2015 00:39
An: How to use LiveCode
Betreff: Re: fastes way to search an array?
Did
Ah k, so it would be situational. After reading back in the thread some, I
suspect the tests would be 2 different strings, so testing for both would
be necessary. I was just not grokking the double. Probably just easier to
set up a single string and check for it twice.
Either way, it runs
Did some testing out of curiosity, and WOW this is fast.
repeat for each key tKey in tArray
if tArray[tKey] begins with tSearchString or \
tArray[tKey] contains tSearchString then
put tKey return after tResults
end if
end repeat
The only question I have is.. why search for the
Actually it may be a bit faster with the two tests if a lot of them match at
the beginning. Testing at the beginning (begins with) is a lot faster than
spinning through the entire thing (contains), and if the first clause of the OR
is satisfied, it won’t execute the second clause. So, maybe.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote:
Out of interest, I added a test which used combine and filter. It took
around 3 times longer than the other two tests.
Yeah, I didn't expect this to be competitive except under specific
circumstances -- if the filter
Thanks Richard and others for you helpful remarks
Tiemo
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] Im Auftrag
von Richard Gaskin
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. April 2015 18:04
An: use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Betreff: Re: fastes way to search
On 2015-04-23 02:15, Richard Gaskin wrote:
In fact, given that SearchArray1 includes the extra overhead of
extracting the keys and creating a text list from them, if it were
faster I'd call it a bug.
I think you may have your SearchArray* functions round the wrong way.
SearchArray1 is 'direct
I have an array with 2 records, where I want to extract all
records,
which either begins with or contains a search string.
From your description I presume your array is of the form:
tArray[key_1] = some string
tArray[key_2] = some string
...
tArray[key_n] = some string
From this you want
Mark, thank you for your comments
Tiemo
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: use-livecode [mailto:use-livecode-boun...@lists.runrev.com] Im Auftrag
von Mark Waddingham
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. April 2015 11:03
An: How to use LiveCode
Betreff: Re: fastes way to search an array?
I have
Tiemo wrote:
I have an array with 2 records, where I want to extract all
records, which either begins with or contains a search string.
Up to now I just loop thru the whole array, do the compare and
extract the result records. I wonder, if there is a way to speed
up this search? E.g.,
Hi Tiemo,
What is the average and worst time that it takes to search your 20,000 record
array now?
Are there users other than you involved? Is it worth the time it will take you
to optimize
the code for the faster execution?
Now that you’ve hopefully answered these questions for yourself, and
Hello,
I have an array with 2 records, where I want to extract all records,
which either begins with or contains a search string.
Up to now I just loop thru the whole array, do the compare and extract the
result records. I wonder, if there is a way to speed up this search? E.g.,
does it
Hi Tiemo,
The computer industry changes so quickly now that
you won’t have to wait very long for the machines to
get faster.
Cheers,
Rick
On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Tiemo Hollmann TB toolb...@kestner.de wrote:
Hi Rick,
On my new and fast development machine the search is pretty fast
One way to do this would be combine the array (or maintain a duplicate
copy) and use the filter command to do the search.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Rick Harrison harri...@all-auctions.com
wrote:
Hi Tiemo,
What is the average and worst time that it takes to search your 20,000
record
way to search an array?
Hi Tiemo,
What is the average and worst time that it takes to search your 20,000 record
array now?
Are there users other than you involved? Is it worth the time it will take you
to optimize the code for the faster execution?
Now that you’ve hopefully answered
Rick Harrison
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 22. April 2015 15:44
An: How to use LiveCode
Betreff: Re: fastes way to search an array?
Hi Tiemo,
What is the average and worst time that it takes to search your 20,000 record
array now?
Are there users other than you involved? Is it worth the time
Note the go url- it's intended to be typed into the message box to
load the stack into Livecode IDE.
On 23/04/2015 00:40, Rick Harrison wrote:
Hi Richard,
I tried this url in Safari - it didn’t work. Are you sure this is the correct
link?
Thanks,
Rick
go url
Works in Firefox and Chrome as well. Andre might suggest maybe Safari's
broken. :)
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
ambassa...@fourthworld.com
I tried it from the message box - it works.
Phil
On 4/22/15 4:40 PM, Rick Harrison wrote:
Hi Richard,
I tried this url in Safari - it didn’t work. Are you sure this is the correct
link?
Thanks,
Rick
go url http://fourthworld.net/lc/array_access_speeds.livecode;
--
Richard Gaskin
Alex Tweedly wrote:
On 22/04/2015 23:51, Richard Gaskin wrote:
May not be much of a need, though, since traversing arrays with what
we have is pretty fast - from my earlier email:
go url http://fourthworld.net/lc/array_access_speeds.livecode;
...
When I try this with 6.7, I get the
On 22/04/2015 23:51, Richard Gaskin wrote:
May not be much of a need, though, since traversing arrays with what
we have is pretty fast - from my earlier email:
go url http://fourthworld.net/lc/array_access_speeds.livecode;
And the conclusion within that stack says ..
The results here
I wonder how easy it would be to add an option to arrayencode. It already
flattens an array nicely, but not in a searchable way. It would be cool to
add an optional argument that still flattens, but doesn't encode. The code
to traverse the array is already there, with an option to leave the data
Out of interest, I added a test which used combine and filter. It took
around 3 times longer than the other two tests.
Pete
lcSQL Software http://www.lcsql.com
Home of lcStackBrowser http://www.lcsql.com/lcstackbrowser.html and
SQLiteAdmin http://www.lcsql.com/sqliteadmin.html
On Wed, Apr 22,
Hi Richard,
I tried this url in Safari - it didn’t work. Are you sure this is the correct
link?
Thanks,
Rick
go url http://fourthworld.net/lc/array_access_speeds.livecode;
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the
Mike Bonner wrote:
I wonder how easy it would be to add an option to arrayencode. It already
flattens an array nicely, but not in a searchable way. It would be cool to
add an optional argument that still flattens, but doesn't encode. The code
to traverse the array is already there, with an
Hi Tiemo,
How many levels deep are the array elements you want to search?
How many words might each of the searchable array elements contain?
How is the array keyed - by sequential number, a preassigned numeric ID,
a content description, ...?
Would it be worth your time when loading the
30 matches
Mail list logo
