John Porter writes: > > I think you've got 'latter' and 'former' the wrong way around here. > > I don't think so, Nat. What he's saying is that the latter method > uses an amount of memory related to the size of the file, while > the former method doesn't (in general).
Perhaps the wording just needs to be clarified to more clearly state which one they should be using. He first says "don't slurp", then implies that the method he *does* suggest doesn't scale to files of any size. That's why I was confused. Rather than have you and I thrash over what he meant, I think Chris should just commit what he did mean :-) Nat
