Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #351863

Re: A maybe interesting code challenge

From Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject Re: A maybe interesting code challenge
Date 2016-04-25 20:26 -0400
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <nfmccp$p21$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (4 earlier) <nfessd$j35$1@dont-email.me> <nfhdi1$isv$1@dont-email.me> <nfheeg$kpu$1@dont-email.me> <nfj7ig$qtd$1@dont-email.me> <nfl8s3$avp$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 04/25/2016 10:19 AM, DFS wrote:
> On 4/24/2016 3:45 PM, Norman Peelman wrote:
>>    Just FYI, I dumped the regex example... it has some faults and I
>> don't know enough about regex to fix it. I'm sure it could be fixed but
>> actually this example (from previous post) is the fastest.
>>
>>
>> Function parseString3()
>>    Dim StartTime
>>    Dim SecondsElapsed
>>
>>    StartTime = Timer
>>
>>    Dim srLine, srarr, criteria, fld1, fld2, fld3
>>
>>    'srLine = "state=GA"
>>    'srLine = "state=GA;namelikeBurger King"
>>    srLine = "state=GA;namelikeBurger King;zip=12345"
>>
>>    srarr = Split(srLine, ";")
>>    criteria = UBound(srarr) + 1
>>
>>    If criteria > 0 Then
>>      fld1 = Split(srarr(0), spChar(srarr(0)))
>>      Debug.Print "'" & Trim(fld1(0)) & "' - '" & Trim(fld1(1)) & "'"
>>    End If
>>
>>    If criteria > 1 Then
>>      fld2 = Split(srarr(1), spChar(srarr(1)))
>>      Debug.Print "'" & Trim(fld2(0)) & "' - '" & Trim(fld2(1)) & "'"
>>    End If
>>
>>    If criteria > 2 Then
>>      fld3 = Split(srarr(2), spChar(srarr(2)))
>>      Debug.Print "'" & Trim(fld3(0)) & "' - '" & Trim(fld3(1)) & "'"
>>    End If
>>
>>    SecondsElapsed = Round(Timer - StartTime, 2)
>>    Debug.Print "This code ran successfully in " & SecondsElapsed & "
>> seconds"
>>
>> End Function
>
>
> Looks good, but it doesn't assign values to variables val1,val2,val3
>
> Also appears to not handle string splitting on = or like (or do you also
> use my spChar() function but didn't show it?)
>
>

   Why must those variables be used? The Split function returns an array 
so instead of 'fld1' and 'val1' you have 'fld1(0)' and 'fld1(1)'. One 
call, not two. Your 'spChar()' is used right there in the code shown. I 
only output it in the same format as you suggested for 'testing' in you 
original post.


Changing the output to:

Debug.Print Trim(fld1(0)) & " " & spChar(srarr(0)) & " " & Trim(fld1(1))

accordingly, shows:


call parseString3()
state = GA
name like Burger King
zip = 12345
This code ran successfully in 0 seconds.

   I'm assuming that means that it run in under .01 seconds.

>
>> ---output---
>>
>> call parseString3()
>> 'state' - 'GA'
>> This code ran successfully in 0 seconds
>>
>> call parseString3()
>> 'state' - 'GA'
>> 'name' - 'Burger King'
>> This code ran successfully in 0 seconds
>>
>> call parseString3()
>> 'state' - 'GA'
>> 'name' - 'Burger King'
>> 'zip' - '12345'
>> This code ran successfully in 0 seconds
>
>
> Time for one parse is meaningless.  We (owl and I) have been timing 6000
> parses.
>
> My VBS does it in 0.156 seconds.  His C program was 0.048 sec.
>


VBScript                      C(owl)
--------                      ------
1 parse per .000026 seconds   1 parse per .000008



Parses   VBScript Time  C Time (owl)
------   -------------  ------------
6000     0.156 secs     0.048 secs
1000000     26 secs         8 secs


   Not to be rude but although I have been scanning the thread, I really 
feel like the goal post keeps moving. You really didn't provide enough 
information at the start.

  Also, understand again... I'm doing this in VBA - so you have to 
factor in that I am dumping output to the 'Immediate Window' (in Access) 
which has inherent performance costs. At the end of the day, there are 
several options to choose from. I can tell you now that as far as the VB 
goes, my version of the core logic will be faster than yours (original) 
by default. It performs only a third of the function calls your does. 
What you want to do with the output and how you want it formatted is 
your business.

   I haven't see owls source, but it would be nice. I do believe he 
mentioned that the lowest times attained were from *not* outputting 
anything to the screen. I would suggest that that be the case. Also, I 
don't know if it's really fair to have disk IO in the mix either. Not to 
mention that I'm still not sure you have revealed the true 
input-through-output desired. 'parseString(srLine)' seems to me to mean 
"feed it one line at a time". You never mentioned running 1000s of 
parses. I believe someone just *did* it and it became part of the request.

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-20 11:37 -0400
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 08:45 -0700
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-20 11:57 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 09:02 -0700
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 01:54 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 18:57 -0700
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 02:45 +0000
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-20 23:01 -0400
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 03:56 +0000
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-21 11:06 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-21 16:13 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-21 17:27 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 19:07 +0000
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzen@gmail.com> - 2016-04-20 19:01 -0700
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 09:37 +0000
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-22 08:33 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 22:03 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Richard King <kingsley651@webby.org> - 2016-04-22 18:22 -0400
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 19:48 +0000
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 17:24 -0400
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 22:18 +0000
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 22:26 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 22:43 +0000
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 22:50 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-22 22:57 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-23 13:07 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-23 09:58 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 21:48 +0000
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 17:00 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-22 21:56 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 19:39 -0400
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-23 15:25 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 13:14 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 18:37 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 16:50 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 21:15 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 18:36 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 23:24 +0000
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-22 08:21 -0400
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-22 10:04 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-23 00:09 -0400
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 00:18 -0400
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-23 05:59 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 12:46 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 19:04 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 20:40 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 17:48 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 22:14 +0000
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-23 23:15 -0400
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-23 23:30 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-24 08:52 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-24 10:06 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-04-24 15:59 +0000
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-24 15:45 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 10:19 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-25 20:26 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 23:24 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-26 05:03 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 11:40 -0400
  Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-25 15:14 +0000
    Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-25 12:05 -0400
      Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-25 18:06 +0000
        Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 12:41 -0400
          Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-26 18:03 +0000
            Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-26 17:39 -0400
              Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 05:50 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 06:43 -0500
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2016-04-27 13:11 +0100
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 13:32 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 07:32 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 15:02 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 08:17 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 16:21 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 09:42 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 21:39 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-27 23:25 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:34 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 05:37 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:42 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 11:45 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 16:23 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 18:40 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 09:58 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 20:57 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 12:06 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-04-27 22:44 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 13:38 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 11:07 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 15:51 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-27 13:30 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-27 21:38 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 11:33 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-28 09:14 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 14:17 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 18:49 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:42 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 13:42 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-04-29 10:54 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 11:20 -0700
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-30 00:31 +0200
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 19:00 -0400
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-30 10:36 -0400
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-05-02 07:54 -0500
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-05-02 15:55 +0200
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-02 07:23 -0700
                Snit digest 215 / 2016-05-02 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-02 14:39 +0000
                Re: Snit digest 215 / 2016-05-02 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-02 07:54 -0700
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-02 14:36 +0000
                Re: Snit digest 214 / 2016-04-29 Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2016-05-02 07:53 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 11:11 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 14:44 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 17:53 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-04-29 23:56 +0200
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 18:09 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-29 19:09 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-30 07:31 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-05-01 08:21 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-05-01 08:47 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-02 14:54 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-05-02 21:54 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-28 15:39 -0600
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:48 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-04-29 16:57 -0600
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-27 21:33 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-28 05:45 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-27 21:32 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-27 21:48 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 22:57 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:44 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-29 16:32 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-27 23:05 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2016-04-28 03:20 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2016-04-28 09:52 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-29 02:46 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2016-04-29 08:33 -0700
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2016-04-30 09:31 -0400
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 05:42 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-04-28 06:17 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2016-04-28 06:56 +0000
                Re: A maybe interesting code challenge Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2016-04-28 05:46 -0400

csiph-web