Re^2: Best method to diff very large array efficiently

Like already explained, if keys are sufficient then setting values doesn't make sense (well the OP was updated w/o mention...)

Changing this @diff3{@arr_1} = @arr_1; to @diff3{@arr_1} = () makes some difference.

Cheers Rolf

( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

Comment on Re^2: Best method to diff very large array efficiently Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Best method to diff very large array efficiently by Kenosis (Priest) on Nov 25, 2013 at 22:43 UTC
I `undef @arr_2_hash{@arr_2};` in `sub hash_grep()`, noting it was faster than the OP's original. Changing this @diff3{@arr_1} = @arr_1; to @diff3{@arr_1} = () makes some difference. No--it makes a huge difference and it, by far, blows everything else away. Will make that change in a new sub and re-benchmark. Glad you mentioned it!	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Best method to diff very large array efficiently by LanX (Saint) on Nov 25, 2013 at 22:51 UTC
Well I think it depends on the testcase, I tried random numbers in an intervall 1..1e6 like BUK did. See my benchmark here RFC extending Benchmark.pm to facilitate CODEHASHREF Maybe I did something wrong ... ... but I'm not to keen to continue, IMHO all approaches are already fast enough. Cheers Rolf ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language) update oops `undef @hash{@arr}` is significantly faster than `@hash{@arr}=()`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Best method to diff very large array efficiently by Kenosis (Priest) on Nov 25, 2013 at 23:00 UTC
Well I think it depends on the testcase... Indeed, I think you're correct. And since the OP had some very specific specs, the qualified language "based upon benchmarking for this task" was used when characterizing the benchmarking results. It was surprising to see how 'slow' `Set::Scalar` was, in this case. It may, in part, have to do with it maintaining the object-accessible universe of numbers from which the diff is calculated -- also accessed via the returned object. update Yes, `undef @diff3{@arr_1}` makes the OP's original solution faster than using `@diff3{@arr_1} = ()`. Have updated the benchmarking. Thank you, again.	[reply] [d/l] [select]