On Wednesday, April 21, 2004, at 06:55 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: "Monte Goulding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: But what's the question? (was: RB clear winner in speed test) To: "How to use Revolution" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
We can't change the fact that RB has a faster substring searcher than Rev but we can make that fact irrelevant.
Cheers
Monte
Monte,
I don't think this is true. There's no reason that offset(), "is in", and "contains" shouldn't all be
1) the same speed, and
2) faster than the equivalent RealBasic versions.
From the various tests that people have been doing it's obvious that these three functions have never been optimized. There are lots of very fast offset() functions available that handle grep-like expressions that are much faster than what is being used by RR -- I would look at the gnu versions for a start...
-- Frank
p.s. And split() could be sped up at the same time...
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
