You save a millisecond by leaving out a letter. Evidently you
realized that. And is that supposed to be "Patrician me", or
"Patricia 'n' me", or what?
I just pute inn a feuw to make us eeeven.
(I know its lame, but I have no other response.)
> What's wrong with:
>
> JM 2.clearsgtsQ2
Nothing wrong with it. We were just remarking its stateliness
relative to the other methods. My CountUp S/G remover does 100
iterations of your 44-S/G removal operations in .6 seconds on my
machine. Clearsgts takes 3.9 seconds -- six and a half times as
slow.
That's all. That comes down to about .04 or 1/25th of a
second for a single iteration with Clearsgts. Dunno 'bout you, but
I ain't got that kinda time. Gotta run....
Things are slow around here. But I like the principle of saving time and
being economical. But to honor Robert's point about non-blunderbussing, I
should program-in that it clears only the S/Gs it actually uses.
Thanks again.
Harry Binswanger
hb@xxxxxxxx