Re: [OctDev] Re: strfind.m

[William P. Y. H. <wil...@gm...>]

On 2/21/06, Dmitri A. Sergatskov <das...@gm...> wrote:
> >
> > The implementations are attached as text attachments. I personally
> > prefer implementation 1, but for inclusion to octave I think John
> > should choose one.
> >

Reading my own words, it's like "John should choose 1". What I mean
is, I think John should choose one of the above.

>
> FWIW: In my experience I need to use strfind usually on text that is
> a string. Normally this is a part of parsing of some external data file
> with a not well-defined structure.
> The text is a cellstr usually when there is a known or well-defined
> structure and one can use this knowledge to optimise the search.
> So my vote would go for the Implementation 4 -- I would like to have
> the best performance for the most common case rather than the best
> performance in the most general case.
>

Well, Implementation 1 has the best performance in both cases I tested
above... Although I must admit that the code for the pattern search (5
lines) is duplicated (once for string, once for cellstr).

--
William Poetra Yoga Hadisoeseno