From: Tom Sawyer <transami@...>
Date: 2003-01-12T08:38:23+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby:  politics & performance [long]

On Saturday 11 January 2003 01:47 pm, Louis Krupp wrote:

Louis Krupp,

one option might be to use hashes in place of arrays. you can index them 
yourself. instead of [a, b, c] use {0=>a, 1=>b, 2=>c}. hashes, i was suprised 
to discover, are around 12x faster than arrays.

other than that, you should bug Matz about your change. speed imporvements are 
always welcome. perhaps it will inspire an improved solution.

-- 
tom sawyer, aka transami
transami@transami.net


                                   .''.
       .''.      .        *''*    :_\/_:     .
      :_\/_:   _\(/_  .:.*_\/_*   : /\ :  .'.:.'.
  .''.: /\ :   ./)\   ':'* /\ * :  '..'.  -=:o:=-
 :_\/_:'.:::.  | ' *''*    * '.\'/.' _\(/_'.':'.'
 : /\ : :::::  =  *_\/_*     -= o =-  /)\    '  *
  '..'  ':::' === * /\ *     .'/.\'.   '._____
      *        |   *..*         :       |.   |' .---"|
        *      |     _           .--'|  ||   | _|    |
        *      |  .-'|       __  |   |  |    ||      |
     .-----.   |  |' |  ||  |  | |   |  |    ||      |
 ___'       ' /"\ |  '-."".    '-'   '-.'    '`      |_.
------------------------------------------------------------