On 2/3/13 2:30 PM, Alex Tweedly wrote:
On 02/02/2013 18:56, J. Landman Gay wrote:
On 2/2/13 3:08 AM, Alex Tweedly wrote:
There's no need to decrease kBrute to deal with
short lines, because we still do a full search (in this case using
filter) when we get down to a block of size kBrute.
Aha. The filter is the part I missed. I get it now. Clever.
Hmmm - kinda "clever", as in "cute clever".
But also kinda dumb, as in "why abandon an efficient method for an
inefficient one, just to save a little bit of thinking" :-)
So I went back, did the thinking, eliminated kBrute (and thankfully the
need for an unnecessary assumption/requirement to limit line length). I
also changed it so that when we are about to test, we always have a
complete line identified - and so it is much easier to adapt the code
for other purposes.
I'd much rather you did the thinking than me, so thanks very much for
this. Now I have a new function to add to my collection and it was quite
painless. :)
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
