Your suggestion of using {"192.168"}{"101.208"} is indeed almost as small as my pack version, so it shows close to no gain in memory. Both are however 40% smaller than the original {"192.168.101.208"}.
I just included all of those to show the differences in size.
I first thought I'd use Socket::inet_aton, but that of course does not support the {A.B}{C.D} split.
The win in using pack over plain is not the .3% gain in memory size, but the ease of sorting.
In reply to Re^4: Hash Search is VERY slow
by Tux
in thread Hash Search is VERY slow
by rtjensen
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |