I tried to alert the OP to this issue in my post:
I would expect this to be tremendously slower than using tr/// on large data sets.
And your benchmark confirms it; there's a tremendous difference, in favor of using tr/// to do what it was designed to do. I think your tr/// method missed reversing the string afterwards, but that won't change the fact that the tr/// approach is the way to go.
Dave
In reply to Re^2: Create the reverse complement DNA sequence without pattern matching and reverse built-in function?
by davido
in thread Create the reverse complement DNA sequence without pattern matching and reverse built-in function?
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |