if I am correct...
list boxes should/do behave as arrays.
So... you should - no I have not done the testing -
that inserting (add to location {<Size of array}) into an array would
be slower then appending (adding to the end).
EVEN IF, the array's memory did not have to be reallocated (it does),
if you insert into location 10 of a 100 element array, 90 elements have
to be "shifted" to their current location +1 (10 -> 11, 11-> 12 etc).
This will/does/should add overhead.
If you are inserting - especially blank/empty columns - rather then
appending the columns to your list boxes I would expect this to be
slower. In a previous email I mentioned that I do dynamic list boxes
every where I use them.
I always (generic code) append the new column(s).
Listbox Insert column(listbox;size of listbox+1; colname; etc)
On Tue, 5 Dec 2017 09:11:25 +0000, Piotr Chabot Stadhouders via 4D_Tech
wrote:
>
> I suppose you mean with the same command? Do you mean you think
> putting the column behind the last could be faster than when putting
> columns in front others?
I would expect this to be the case.
---------------
Gas is for washing parts
Alcohol is for drinkin'
Nitromethane is for racing
**********************************************************************
4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG)
FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html
Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html
Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech
Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com
**********************************************************************
