You method - defying all logic (at least *my* logic) - is actually a good deal slower than calling the charToNum() function for each loop. It's about 3 times slower. Tried it a few times just to be sure.
Gilles
On Saturday, May 1, 2004, at 17:12 US/Eastern, Buzz Kettles wrote:
I scanned thru the responses & didn't see anybody suggest this:
Don't do all those charToNum() function calls ...
I think I'd try this approach
#1 building a limited-size string-driven proplist that contains all 256 chars & their charToNums().
(then the overhead for of the function calls is limited and DONE)
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Problems, email [EMAIL PROTECTED]). Lingo-L is for learning and helping with programming Lingo. Thanks!]
