Well I figured out what the problem is. I assumed that since the
default delimiter was comma, that slpitting by column took that into
account. It does not. It expects to see a TAB delimited list, NOT a
comma delimited list.
ON testFunction
breakpoint
put "1,2,3" & return & "4,5,6" into myVar
replace comma WITH tab in myVar
split myVar by column
delete variable myVar[2]
combine myvar by column
replace tab WITH comma in myVar
put myVar
END testFunction
This works just fine.
Bob Sneidar
IT Manager
Logos Management
Calvary Chapel CM
On Feb 9, 2009, at 3:54 PM, Richard Gaskin wrote:
Alex Tweedly wrote:
I haven't tested extensively, but in a simple case or two, it seems
to
work just doing
split tVar by column
delete variable tVar[3] -- to delete the 3rd column
combine tVar by column
Oddly enough, the split-and-combine method benchmark about 30% slower
than "repeat for each". This isn't too suprising given that split and
combine are very computationally intensive operations, each
effectively
doing its own "repeat for each" under the hood (albeit in compiled
code).
Also, there's an anomaly with combine that adds a new line to the
data,
with the right number of columns each being empty. Not sure what's up
with that, but to get the same result I just added a line to the
function to delete it - here's the code I tested:
-- Field 1 holds the data; in this test I used congressional
-- contact info, with 540 lines of 8 items each.
on mouseUp
put 100 into n
put fld 1 into tData
--
put the millisecs into t
repeat n
put DelCol1(tData, 3) into r1
end repeat
put the millisecs - t into t1
--
put the millisecs into t
repeat n
put DelCol2(tData, 3) into r2
end repeat
put the millisecs - t into t2
put t1 && t2
end mouseUp
function DelCol1 pData, pCol
put empty into tNuData
set the itemdel to tab
repeat for each line tLine in pData
delete item 3 of tLine
put tLine &cr after tNuData
end repeat
delete last char of tNuData
return tNuData
end DelCol1
function DelCol2 pData, pCol
set the columnDelimiter to tab
split pData by column
delete variable pData[3] -- to delete the 3rd column
combine pData by column
delete last line of pData
return pData
end DelCol2
RESULT: 123 165
Given the internal overhead of split and combine, I tend to use them
only when I need to do a large number of lookups of specific records
since the array hash is blindingly fast to traverse, esp. relative to
the ultra-slow "get line x of tData".
For single lookups the split/combine overhead eats up more than the
savings from not using "get line x". I haven't yet done enough testing
to determine the number of lookups that would represent the cutoff on
that (and there may also be a relationship with data size, and that's
way too much testing for me to do in my spare time <g>).
--
Richard Gaskin
Fourth World
Revolution training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
Webzine for Rev developers: http://www.revjournal.com
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
_______________________________________________
use-revolution mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
