At 10:37 PM +0100 2/28/05, Ronald Vogelaar wrote:
Just to make it clear, the reason I doubt that mine is 100x faster,
is because countfields doesn't have much room to go wrong. I mean,
a simple byte counting loop is hard to beat, and easy to code.
Well, the numbers don't lie.
Sometimes they do -- when the test is written incorrectly. I agree
with Theo here, it seems very unlikely that CountFields could be so
much faster (though of course is not a simple byte-counting loop, as
it is encoding- and case-savvy). The built-in function is very
efficient for what it does, even switching to a Boyer-Moore search if
the separator string is long enough and in cases where that is
possible.
Of course in cases where a binary search would do, then an InStrB
loop can indeed be faster.
Best,
- Joe
--
REAL World 2005 - The REALbasic User Conference
March 23-25, 2005, Austin, Texas
<http://www.realsoftware.com/realworld>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|