At 10:32PM -0700 8/2/03, Edwin Gore wrote: >Scott's method (adding a counter) is absolutely the right way to go. Others >on the list have benchmarked this, and it's MUCH faster than doing the for x >= etc. etc. etc. method.
Although it should be pointed out that the speed difference is usually insignificant if you are doing few enough iterations through the loop. (For example, if you're processing 100 lines and checking the number of items in each, even "repeat with x =" takes only a couple of milliseconds. On the other hand, if you're doing 10000 lines, the speed difference becomes much more important.) In the case where the speed difference isn't significant, the "repeat with x" form is a bit more readable since it makes it more obvious that you're tracking the line number, and this may be enough reason to use that form. -- Jeanne A. E. DeVoto ~ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Runtime Revolution Limited - Software at the Speed of Thought http://www.runrev.com/ _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
