Re: efficiency question on text manipulation using string vs buffer

[Nikolaj Schumacher]

Xah Lee <xahlee@gmail.com> wrote:

> It appears to me, testing these commands on a text selection with
> about 122k chars that needs to be replaced, the second version is only
> 1 second slower? (both finishes within 2 or 3 seconds, on a 2007
> midrange PC)

You should note that the replace-string function is pretty smart.
It only does one big concat, so not that much string manipulation actually
happens in this case.  The majority of time is probably spent on the
regexp search anyway, making direct comparison moot.


regards,
Nikolaj Schumacher