3 Dec
2008
3 Dec
'08
11:10 a.m.
Hallo, Matt Barber hat gesagt: // Matt Barber wrote:
[list-sort] still beats it. I have a feeling that some of the overhead in [list-shellsort] is in the [list-swap] function and other list-abs objects, which are a little too feature-rich and/or idiot-proof for this particular use. =o)
Attached is a variant of [list-idx] called [list-nth] that probably is a lot faster. It doesn't handle negative indices, however. It's based on modifying a message box to get the element by index, which should reduce the memory load with long lists.
Ciao
Frank Barknecht Do You RjDj.me? _ ______footils.org__