RB unclear couldyetbewinner in speedwhatfor microtest :-)

[David Vaughan]

On 22/04/2004, at 10:12, Brian Yennie <briany at qldlearning.com> wrote:
>
> Monte,
>
> Looks ok here. I ran the old vanilla offset() function and it got the 
> same number of matches.
>
> Is anyone seeing differently?
>
>>>
>>> On guard! Another Rev entry!
>>
>> That's fast Brian (64 tickes here) but not meaning to offend I 
>> noticed that
>> it only produces 18 matches. Is this correct as a post the other day
>> indicated there should be nearly 250 matches?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Monte

Brian, Monte

The 250 referred to the old triple-word search. In the new search 
concentrating on 4-7-word phrases 18 is, as I see it, the right answer. 
It is still unknown what you are supposed to do with duplicate matches 
or, as Monte so nicely put it on reading the book, why we are doing 
this anyway.

regards
David