I figured the filter command would carry at least some overhead for its
convenience, but I had no idea how much!
I wrote the test below to compare it with walking through a list line by
line, and the results were surprising:
on mouseUp
put fwdbCurTableData() into s -- gets 10,800 lines of
-- tab-delimited data
--
-- Method 1: filter command
--
put format("*a*\t*r*\tr\t*\t*\t*\t*\t*") into tFilter
put s into result1
put the millisecs into t
filter result1 with tFilter
put the millisecs - t into t1
--
--
-- Method 2: repeat for each
--
set the itemdel to tab
put the millisecs into t
repeat for each line tLine in s
if item 1 of tLine contains "a" \
AND item 2 of tLine contains "r"\
AND item 3 of tLine is "r" then
put tLine&cr after result2
end if
end repeat
delete last char of result2
put the millisecs - t into t2
--
put result1 into fld "result"
put result2 into fld "result2"
--
put "Filter: "&t1 &cr& "Repeat: "&t2
end mouseUp
Results -
Filter: 745
Repeat: 40
Did I miss something, or am I just seeing the penalty for the filter
command's generalization?
--
Richard Gaskin
Managing Editor, revJournal
_______________________________________________________
Rev tips, tutorials and more: 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
