Re: Re: Re: Is too little too much? Coding under the microscope...

Err, yes the logic is correct. But why don't just write that as simple as this?

$newest =  (sort { -M $a <=> -M $b } <*.log>)[0];
[download]

or if you have large amount of files, you'd better cache the result of -M:

$newest= (sort { ($m{$a} ||= -M $a) <=> ($m{$b} ||= -M $b) } <*.log>)[
+0];
[download]

Comment on Re: Re: Re: Is too little too much? Coding under the microscope... Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Is too little too much? Coding under the microscope... by Abigail (Deacon) on Jun 28, 2001 at 20:57 UTC
Well, if you have a large amount of files and you want to find the newest, the only reasonable optimization of your `sort` is the removal of said `sort`! You don't need more than a single pass (using linear time) to find an extreme. `my $extreme = [365_000, undef]; foreach (<.log>) { $extreme = [-M, $_] if $extreme -> [0] > -M } my $newest = $extreme -> [1];` [download] And if you want to sort them, faster than an Orcish Maneuvre or a Schwartian Transform is the Guttman-Rosler Transform: `@files = map {substr $_ => 18} sort map {sprintf "%017.10f %s" => -M, $_} <.log>;` [download] -- Abigail	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re: Is too little too much? Coding under the microscope...
by Abigail (Deacon) on Jun 28, 2001 at 20:57 UTC

sort

    my $extreme = [365_000, undef];
    foreach (<*.log>) {
        $extreme = [-M, $_] if $extreme -> [0] > -M
    }
    my $newest = $extreme -> [1];
[download]

    @files = map {substr $_ => 18}
             sort
             map {sprintf "%017.10f %s" => -M, $_} <*.log>;
[download]

-- Abigail

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]