If your list is already sorted, the performance of a binary search is pretty hard to beat. It'd probably still be a good choice even if you have to perform the sort first.
You could also check out an associative array or dictionary, but I don't know how well that will perform with thousands of properties. One iteration through the first list to build the array, then a single check to find an item. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Nate Pearson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The server I am running on is a 900mhz machine while the desktops at > work are 3.0 Pentium 4s. I figured client side would be quicker. > > I am filtering off on a string. I there wasn't a nice computer > sciencey way to do it I was going to use pointers to jump around in > the sorted list. > > Any one else have any ideas? > > > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Bjorn Schultheiss > <bjorn.schultheiss@> wrote: > > > > With a complex objects list this is difficult. > > I would suggest doing it server side. > > > > If the lists contained numerical or string items you could rely on > > sorting to make your iteration process shorter. > > > > > > Bjorn > > > > > > On 17/05/2007, at 4:36 AM, Nate Pearson wrote: > > > > > What's the best practice when you have to compare two large lists? My > > > main list is 9000 objects long. I have to compare this to another > > > list which might have 4000 objects in it. > > > > > > Right now I'm doing it the WRONG way. For each row in the Main list i > > > iterate through every item in the 4000 objects. As soon as I hit a > > > match I return a true and that exits the iteration. This is still a > > > very slow process. > > > > > > Both lists are dynamic. > > > > > > Any ideas on the right way to do this? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Nate > > > > > > > > > > > >
