Re: the Holy Grail of AppleScript lists
Re: the Holy Grail of AppleScript lists
- Subject: Re: the Holy Grail of AppleScript lists
- From: Paul Berkowitz <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 14:10:54 -0800
On 3/20/03 1:45 PM, "has" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
Paul Skinner wrote:
>
>
>> -->list of 8291 items.
>
>>
>
>> Nothing very remarkable in this. Despite what the Standard Additions
>
>> dictionary might claim, the 'do shell script' command returns Unicode
>
>> text, not a string. The ~4000-item stack overflow problem only affects
>
>> the latter type.
>
>>
>
>
>
> You say that as if it's common knowledge. Did I miss the memo?
>
>
I don't believe it was ever broken, and can't recall anyone ever saying it
>
was.
>
>
Maybe some folk were thinking that because the string type was buggy
>
the Unicode type would have the same bug too? If so, that's a bad
>
assumption - like thinking that because Firestone tyres blow up,
>
tyres from every other manufacturer will explode as well. Case in
>
point: the Unicode text type [IIRC] for a while had TID-related bugs
>
which the string type didn't, and nobody thought the string type was
>
broken because of it.
has,
I recall your saying recently that the great speed advantage of searching a
long string to see if it contains a search string, over the very slow
process of searching a list of strings to see if the list contains the same
search string, is not matched by Unicode text. Does anyone know if this
slower processing of Unicode text searches using 'contains' has anything to
do with the lack of a limit on the stack, or is totally unrelated (and
therefore fixable)?
--
Paul Berkowitz
_______________________________________________
applescript-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/applescript-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.