On Jul 8, 2005, at 10:57 PM, Buster wrote:
Hi Raymond, Dennis and everybody else,
The way proposed by Dennis is indeed the fastest on not too large
amounts of data.
So it is only fair to test the other way around too and try Dennis
proposal on the same amount of data on which Raymond used his handler
Raymond's handler is a neat trick.
Though it is at least 2 times slower than a replace + split method.
Greetings,
Wouter
Wouter,
Nice script for comparing the different methods. However, you have
changed the original problem from a true/false test if there was a
match of any items in two arrays to returning an intersect of the
data. That is Ok and a useful operation to understand, but it does
skew the results in a different way. If I apply the original
criteria, the repeat for each completes as soon as it finds the first
match. With the random data in your example, that usually happens in
much less time than than the other two methods.
Dennis
_______________________________________________
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
