Re: Array efficiency (was:Dynamic Arrays)

["Booth Martin" <Booth@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Several thoughts come to mind.  First, we don't really much care about
efficiency, we care about effectiveness.  Second, we are beginning to accept
the idea that maintenance is where we really lose our efficiencies anyway,
not in the CPU.  Third, flexibility is what we want for our designs.
Flexibility is in the data, not in array manipulation. Fourth, as we move
closer and closer to full searchs and things like EVI we want to be in the
database, not in volatile arrays.


---------------------------------------------------------
Booth Martin   http://www.MartinVT.com
Booth@MartinVT.com
---------------------------------------------------------

-------Original Message-------

From: rpg400-l@midrange.com
Date: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 05:26:52 PM
To: rpg400-l@midrange.com
Subject: Re: Array efficiency (was:Dynamic Arrays)


On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Steve Landess wrote:
>

> Sure, files have overhead. But so do arrays when using indexed elements in

> an RPG program.


Everything has overhead. But arrays usually have less, depending on the
circumstance, of course.

For example, if you need to retrieve the 100th record of a file, compared
with retrieving the 100th element of an array...

The array is clearly more efficient. ...