Difference between revisions of "Talk:SubStringLastIndex"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Void Singer (talk | contribs) m (@ Recursion) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Normally I would've just whacked such a dangerous code, but recursion is a (normally) valid handling method, and and I can imagine cases with long string that are known to generate few multiple that it might be workable with, so I just tagged it with the warning... of course this ignores the fact that LSL is pass-by-value, odds are it's gonna blow up in almost any scenario... perhaps I (or some bored person) should write the proper looping version? just a thought =)<br/>-- '''[[User:Void_Singer|Void]]''' <sup><small>([[User_talk:Void_Singer|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Void_Singer|contribs]])</small></sup> 04:11, 27 March 2012 (PDT) | Normally I would've just whacked such a dangerous code, but recursion is a (normally) valid handling method, and and I can imagine cases with long string that are known to generate few multiple that it might be workable with, so I just tagged it with the warning... of course this ignores the fact that LSL is pass-by-value, odds are it's gonna blow up in almost any scenario... perhaps I (or some bored person) should write the proper looping version? just a thought =)<br/>-- '''[[User:Void_Singer|Void]]''' <sup><small>([[User_talk:Void_Singer|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Void_Singer|contribs]])</small></sup> 04:11, 27 March 2012 (PDT) | ||
:I once had a situation in LSL where recursion was the best solution (optimized for bytecode to avoid stack-heap collision). I don't approve of this implementation either. I might be board enough this week end. -- '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 22:03, 27 March 2012 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 21:03, 27 March 2012
@ Recursion
Normally I would've just whacked such a dangerous code, but recursion is a (normally) valid handling method, and and I can imagine cases with long string that are known to generate few multiple that it might be workable with, so I just tagged it with the warning... of course this ignores the fact that LSL is pass-by-value, odds are it's gonna blow up in almost any scenario... perhaps I (or some bored person) should write the proper looping version? just a thought =)
-- Void (talk|contribs) 04:11, 27 March 2012 (PDT)