•Re^2: Finding oldest file in directory

Careful. The high-water-mark algorithm is actually slower than sorting to get the highest value, for some small number of items. Think of the few lines of Perl code that would have to be repeatedly executed for each item. Then think of how little work it takes directly in C to sort that list instead.

Yes, surprising when I first heard it too.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker
Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.

Comment on •Re^2: Finding oldest file in directory

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Finding oldest file in directory by theorbtwo (Prior) on Oct 19, 2004 at 13:16 UTC
Note that the arguments against a perl-based high-water-mark algorithm don't apply to List::Util::max, which, like sort, is written in C. (The overhead of a function call vs the overhead of other opcodes does, however, apply, but that's a very small difference.)	[reply]
•Re^4: Finding oldest file in directory by merlyn (Sage) on Oct 19, 2004 at 13:22 UTC
Yes, I was talking about builtin Perl sort vs a Perl-coded high-water mark. Your List::Util's max doesn't apply in the referenced case (largest file), because max can't be coaxed to doing an indirection, so you'd need a GRT style translation, or else you're back to open coding it, again. The point here is that high-water-mark is one strategy, and sorting is another strategy, with different costs depending on the length. The only real takeaway here is Benchmark will know, because you can't always guess. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.	[reply]