Re^2: Help with problem

[Anonymous Monk]

The suggestion of Anonymous Monk that it’s because you skip the empty lines doesn’t persuade

And what is your suggestion, why do you think it happens ?

The code is fairly short and simple, and we only have live4tech's word that there are missing records

Your reworking of live4tech's code , aside from moving the 300,000-th line into the new file, doesn't change anything else -- if live4tech's original code had records go missing, so would your reworked code (they're virtually identical)

[Athanasius]

They're virtually identical

Except that my pattern matching is (slightly) different.

As I said, I don’t know why the original code wasn’t working (except for the off-by-one error). At best, the use of \r\n in the pattern match may be a red herring, in which case it will be useful to “eliminate it from our inquiries” (I read too many whodunnits). At worst, it may be introducing some bug which live4tech will find is fixed in my version.

It will be interesting to find out.

[Anonymous Monk]

Except that my pattern matching is (slightly) different.

That doesn't matter. The only possible result from using that pattern would be losing skipping even more records.

Superstition is not a good reason to introduce code changes :)