On 9/10/06 12:06 AM, "Richard Gaskin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I have two questions about this sort of parsing as opposed to using a > field object to so the same: > > 1. Which is more fault-tolerant? Good question - one problem with the field object that was identified by Sivakatirswami back in August with this was that if you have an html tag with <title> in it (like: <title>Chapter 1: Great Revolution Recipes</title>), when you set the htmlText of the field to the html that contains the <title>, everything that is in the <title> tag doesn't show up in the field, and can't be retrieved ever again. Granted, I'm sure there are only a few situations like this, and are not likely to affect 99% of us, but I think the replaceText solution is at about the same level of efficiency. > 2. Which is faster? The field approach, hands down. This is because any regex that needs to run needs to be handled by the PCRE library so there's more "hand off" time involved. Just my 2 cents, Ken Ray Sons of Thunder Software Web site: http://www.sonsothunder.com/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ 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
