On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Chris White <cwprogram / live.com> wrote:
>
>> I didn't mention it, but I was trying not to iterate. But, I guess I
>> need to if I want to get more speed.
>
> The question here is going to come down to why you're so worried about sp=
eed. What's your specific use case? The one you gave us seems to simplified=
 to vouch for going the optimization route. Are you repeating this process =
thousands of times? With larger data sets? Computer processing power has ev=
olved a lot over the years to the point to where the bar is set higher for =
when granular optimizations are required. If, however, such speed is critic=
al to the application, you also have the route of writing a C level extensi=
on (assuming MRI here).
>
> Regards,
> Chris White
> Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cwgem
>
>

I just gave a very simple example.
I want to use larger arrays millions of times.
The speed I have now is acceptable.
I was just trying to squeeze a little more out to see if I could.

Thanks.



Harry