in reply to Re: Eliminating addresses in bulk
in thread Not case sensitive hash?

My is very much faster on large inputs than yours. They are very different.

Hint, wink, wink, wink. I don't think anyone got the joke. I'll know better next time.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Eliminating addresses in bulk
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Oct 26, 2002 at 12:26 UTC
    Oh, right. An array will take less memory and is faster, true.

    Makeshifts last the longest.

      Oh yes, really fun! the code above will truncate your file; perlopentut says:

      Mixing Reads and Writes
      It is possible to specify both read and write access. All you do is add a "+" symbol in front of the redirection. But as in the shell, using a less-than on a file never creates a new file; it only opens an existing one. On the other hand, using a greater-than always clobbers (truncates to zero length) an existing file, or creates a brand-new one if there isn't an old one. Adding a "+" for read-write doesn't affect whether it only works on existing files or always clobbers existing ones.

      If you don't like spammers, like me, don't answer to their questions, ok?

      Valerio

        I leave the spammers alone much more than they I.

        I didn't answer his question, I changed the subject.

        I can't express how badly I feel about the typo in my posted code! (guffaw) Drat, fixed it doesn't run as fast nor eliminate as many addresses, and the other bug will show. (tired sigh)

        Dry humor can be fun sometimes. No harm done, seems no one noticed.

        This was an education for me. I thought with the wild performance claims, the change of subject and the reference to Chip, that someone might give the code more than just the glance it would otherwise deserve.

        Do we have The Walking Lint around here? Who was that enfuzzled1 man?


        1  Yes, you're right there is no such word.