Bram said: > Thanks. I'll add it in the todo list. Although we may add uniq() instead. > Consistancy with Unix is useful.
I just wanted to weigh in on the idea of adding uniq() instead of sortuniq(). The modularity of Unix commands is great and all, but when working with big data sets you want to scale as efficiently as possible. In Unix, "sort -u" is more efficient than "sort | uniq". The difference can be dramatic. (Note: Not all Unix "sort" commands support -u.) If a combined sortuniq() turns out to be the most efficient implementation, then I'd urge you to go with that. Of course a standalone uniq() could also be provided, but use cases for uniq() seem to be fairly niche outside of sorting. -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to vim_dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
