There is another option here. If you have a multi-attribute list you can use FOR...NEXT or REMOVE or SELECT They should all give you a similar speed. However, as was pointed out, if you have a multi-valued list and use FOR...NEXT at least one poster believed that it does NOT keep a pointer to where you left off, and so REMOVE was suggested. However if you use SELECT in this case you will find a similar speed to REMOVE. SELECT does not need to operate on a file, it can also operate on a variable like this: DONE = @FALSE A = "DOG":@VM:"FOOD":@VM:"IS":@VM:"TASTY" SELECT A TO MYLIST * or alternatively SELECT A TO 1 READNEXT WORD FROM MYLIST ELSE DONE = @TRUE The first pass will put "DOG" into the WORD variable, the second will put FOOD, etc. Exactly as you would intuitively think. And it's much faster than reparsing the list on every pass. Get jiggy with it. Will Johnson Fast Forward Technologies -----Original Message----- From: Barry Brevik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:38:34 -0700 Subject: RE: [U2] Clarification on FOR...NEXT loops
>>advantage over FOR...NEXT, that things have changed (since UV 9.6?) and >>the system is keeping track of where you are in the array in both cases. >This functionality was added to universe at revision 7.3.1 (january of 1993 >specifically). I'm running UV 9.6.1.3 on Win2000. My personal experiments indicate that there is indeed a huge speed improvement with REMOVE over FOR/NEXT when processing a dynamic array. If you are concerned then why not test it on your own version to see if it's an issue? When I have a dynamic array with multiple levels of separators, like @FM, @VM and @SM, I find REMOVE inconvenient to use, so I cheat and go with FOR/NEXT. Unless there are serious performance problems. Barry ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/ ------- u2-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe please visit http://listserver.u2ug.org/
