Yes, but the second way is so much more sophisticated. Bob S
On Feb 8, 2015, at 13:52 , J. Landman Gay <jac...@hyperactivesw.com<mailto:jac...@hyperactivesw.com>> wrote: Just tinkering around on a lazy Sunday, and I thought I'd come up with a neat way to reverse a list without using the traditional clunky method: function reverseSort pList repeat for each line l in pList put l & cr before tList end repeat return tList end reverseSort One of the best things I learned from a past LC converence came from Jerry Daniels who said "let the engine do it." It's almost always faster and more efficient. With that in mind I wrote this: local sNum function reverseText pList put the number of lines in pList into sNum sort lines of pList numeric by reverseSort(each) return pList end reverseText function reverseSort pTxt subtract 1 from sNum return sNum && pTxt end reverseSort Works great and I was proud. Then I did some timing tests and found out the two methods are very close to equivalent in timing, and on long lists, the first way is actually faster. So much for improving on LC's text chunking speed. Pah. -- Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com<mailto:jac...@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
