Hi Joe, > For my own curiosity, should Pilog perform much better than a > collect/filter? I would think that collect/filter should be nearly > instant on upwards of a few thousand items (untested). When the data
Yes, I would say so too. And for larger results sets, or if multiple indexes are involved where you don't know which one will give the best hits, 'select' is better. > psuedocode: > > (let > (Started (collect 'sDate '+Proj Sdate) # find project started > after the S date > Ended (collect 'eDate '+Proj "1900-01-01" Edate) # find projects > ended before the end date > StartedBefore (collect 'sDate '+Proj "1900-01-01" Sdate) # > projects with start date before range > EndedAfter (collect 'eDate '+Proj Edate) # projects with end date > after the range > > > With this approach, the various sets would be tested and duplicates removed > > maybe something like this > > (uniq Started Ended (sect StartedBefore EndedAfter)) > .. > > I might have the logic wrong, but I would wonder if that's faster than > just hitting all the entries and filtering with a typical use case I would say that multiple 'collect's, followed by merging and uniq'ing, are more expensive. ♪♫ Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picolisp@software-lab.de?subject=Unsubscribe
