|
|
|
Clear questions and runnable code get the best and fastest answer |
|
| PerlMonks |
Comment on |
| ( #3333=superdoc: print w/ replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
|
I wasn't implying that my perl version was faster than the C version. I think it is save to say that for every perl program, there is a C program that can perform the same task in less time. I was stating that using index and substr where you can is almost always faster than using a regexp, so my index and substr version was faster than the join and split versions listed above. So I was comparing different perl implementations. I guess I probably should have timed one of the split/join examples and included that, but I didn't know which one was the fastest. So I included the timing based on the C version of cut, which gives a baseline for anyone to compare against. - Cees In reply to Re^3: cut vs split (and on usefullness of cat, too:-))
by cees
|
|