I did not realize that you were trying to exploit the ordering of the edits. One way that your original code is wrong is that ignores an edit which does not belong to the current sequence rather than applying it to the next sequence. This would not be simple to fix.
I strongly recommend you change to BrowserUK's algorithm. It would be very easy to add a test to verify that the character at the position to be edited is what the edit expects. The additional effort would be paid back, the first time that it finds an example of inconsistent data.
In reply to Re^5: Replacing substrings within hash values
by BillKSmith
in thread Replacing substrings within hash values
by K_Edw
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |