RE: array handling

Third and fourth things today, and the list was almost dead...

:-)

jt


| -----Original Message-----
| From: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
| [mailto:midrange-l-admin@midrange.com]On Behalf Of Leif Svalgaard
| Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2001 10:49 AM
| To: midrange-l@midrange.com
| Subject: Re: array handling
| Importance: High
|
|
| From: Carsten Flensburg <flensburg@novasol.dk>
|
| > A new way of dealing with this potential performance problem
| was recently
| > introduced. - V5R1 added the %LOOKUP built-in-function which
| allows you to
| > specify a fourth optional parameter specifying the maximum number of
| > compares to perform.
| >
| > If you set this parameter to the current number of elements loaded, you
| > ensure that no unneccessary compares are performed if the
| lookup might end
| > unmatched.
| >
|
| Alternatively you could store the value looked for at the n+1'th position
| (n is number of occupied positions). Then you always find it; if its
| position turned out to be n+1, you know that it wasn't there.
|
| This will work with any release.
|
| _______________________________________________
| This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L)
| mailing list
| To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
| To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
| visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
| or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
| Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
| at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
|