Ruediger Pluem wrote: > > > > > > Certainly strncmp is quicker, since strncasecmp does an auto > > tolower on each char. But we are doing that in both cases, > > whether we're tolower'ing the string first, or whether we're > > doing it at comparison time. So we're not saving anything > > really there. > > Yes, but lowering explicitly is done *outside* the for loop. > strncasecmp is done *inside* the for loop. So we do this via > strncasecmp multiple times on the same data. >
Whatever. Change it then. -- ======================================================================= Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
