uhhh.... picky, but not intended as flamebait since I (and maybe somebody else also?) have told myself -- in language imprecise enough to cause me to spend hours doing the wrong thing -- that I wanted to do some particular thing that later proved not what I wanted at all.

Did the honorable seeker mean precisely "calculate the total number of matching words in a bunch of strings" or is the meaning more nearly encapsulated in the stated desire to find "strings (which) have high probabilities of being the same string" which is quite a different matter."

Writer continues:
"...perhaps the same information, told multiple ways. EX:
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dogs.
vs.
The quick brown dogs jumped over the lazy fox.

"Both strings say the same thing, but they would not generate a normal ($string1 eq $string2) match."

NO!!! both strings do NOT "say the same thing...." and the wirters next example - re the "very quick fox" - is indeed very similar to the "quick fox (who) jumped...." but not very similar to the "quick dogs (who) jumped...."

and ps: Previewed and previewed and previewed as recommended in tips... and reviewed permissable code, etc, but found no explanation of why interjections in quotes - when enclosed as square brackets -- come up as links to nodes?