David,
Maybe there are better ways, but here's what I always do when I have an array
with numbered keys...
put the keys of pArray into aKeys
sort lines of aKeys numeric
repeat for each line k in aKeys
//do something with pArray[k]
end repeat
Hope that helps. :)
-Dan
On 9/10/20, 2:39
Ah that explains it. The extents works but I seem to remember for each is
considerably faster
On 2 Sep 2020, 16:29 +0100, Brian Milby via use-livecode
, wrote:
> As long as the array is indexed starting at 1 with no gaps it should work by
> looping for each element. I just did a quick test to
It appears I have that backwards?
Bob S
> On Sep 2, 2020, at 8:28 AM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
>
> Ditto, and I am not sure what noticeable impact one method would have over
> another. There was some blurb a long time ago about how these keys are
> internally sorted. I believe what was proposed
If the array is indexed from 1 with no gaps, you can do
repeat with I = 1 to item 2 of line 1 of the extents of myArray
Alex
> On 2 Sep 2020, at 15:54, David Bovill via use-livecode
> wrote:
>
> I’m pretty sure there must be a way to efficiently loop through numerically
> indexed arrays
>
Ditto, and I am not sure what noticeable impact one method would have over
another. There was some blurb a long time ago about how these keys are
internally sorted. I believe what was proposed is that a set of NUMERIC keys
beginning with 0 would actually sort correctly.
Bob S
> On Sep 2,
David,
Nope you have to sort them NUMERIC. As you said this is the only way I know of.
I do this all the time. I don't know of any other way.
put the keys of tMyArray into tKeys
sort lines of tKeys numeric
repeat for each line tKey in tKeys
-- do what you want with tMyArray[tKey]
-- this line
As long as the array is indexed starting at 1 with no gaps it should work by
looping for each element. I just did a quick test to confirm. I built a 100
element array and it looped in order. I deleted 2 keys and then it didn’t. I
then added those 2 missing keys back and it worked again.
