Procedural v OO Collections

Robert Wagner wrote:

>Morons post _opinions_. In the case of Micro Focus' Collection
>classes, I posted verifiable _facts_ about their slow speed and also
>verifiable code that runs 50 times faster.
>
>One fact trumps a fist-full of opinions .. at least in the world of
>reason.
>
>

Because you have concluded in your own mind that your *approach* proved
it - it aint necessarily so. And as others have pointed out to you many
times, your own particular reasoning quite frequently contains some
serious flaws.

Please, so I can check on what you actually did, refer me back to the
two messages, where you posted the original Procedural and then the
Collection version. I'm not here to *defend* Micro Focus collections -
that's their job. But I would like to check back on your two programs.

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 19:41:55 GMT, "James J. Gavan" <jjgavan@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>Robert Wagner wrote:
> 
>
>Because you have concluded in your own mind that your *approach* proved
>it - it aint necessarily so. And as others have pointed out to you many
>times, your own particular reasoning quite frequently contains some
>serious flaws.
>
>Please, so I can check on what you actually did, refer me back to the
>two messages, where you posted the original Procedural and then the
>Collection version. I'm not here to *defend* Micro Focus collections -
>that's their job. But I would like to check back on your two programs.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=t...line.net&rnum=8

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=o...line.net&rnum=1

see also multithreading solution:

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=f...line.net&rnum=2