My updated solution always looks for overlap but if none are found it uses optimized versions of the search (private functions instead of inside the main function). I special case for no overlap and a single overlap in the delimiter. It is about the same speed as Geoff’s.
Thanks, Brian On Nov 4, 2018, 6:34 PM -0600, Mark Wieder via use-livecode <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>, wrote: > On 11/4/18 10:40 AM, Geoff Canyon via use-livecode wrote: > > I also added a "with overlaps" option. > > My problem with the pWithOverlaps parameter is that is requires a priori > knowledge of the data being consumed. If you already know there are > overlaps then you'd set the parameter to true. If you don't know whether > or not there are overlaps, then you'd need to set it to true so you > don't miss anything (aside, of course, for the trivial case where you > don't care whether or not there are overlaps - is there a use case for > this?). > > The only time you would set it to false is after you've already > determined that there are no overlaps, and the time spent on that would > probably more than offset the extra processing in the function. > > -- > Mark Wieder > ahsoftw...@gmail.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 _______________________________________________ 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
