Wait, please tell me I'm reading the results wrong.... In my benchmarks yours was faster. But in your benchmarks, "a", which is your algorithm, is taking 5.xx seconds per iteration, whereas "b", which is mine, is taking 0.17-0.9 seconds per iteration. Your benchmark seems to be showing the regexp approach winning by a landslide.
Dave
In reply to Re^6: Fast Replacement (0.01 seconds)
by davido
in thread Fast Replacement
by sathishselvam
For: | Use: | ||
& | & | ||
< | < | ||
> | > | ||
[ | [ | ||
] | ] |