Is that just as efficient as writing it this way?:
Actually, yours is close to 10x more efficient. There is no merit to the 'cute' method beyond it cuteness.
In reply to Re^3: getting the highest value in a simpler way
by BrowserUk
in thread getting the highest value in a simpler way
by replicant4
For: | Use: | ||
& | & | ||
< | < | ||
> | > | ||
[ | [ | ||
] | ] |