Text encoding: summary of results and times.

Alex Tweedly alex at tweedly.net
Fri Sep 3 20:29:24 EDT 2021

I went back and re-did the tests, checking on the results.

The file *is* UTF8, so I need to textDecode() it; if I don't, the result 
are simply wrong, and so the times are irrelevant.

1. Once it has been textDecoded(), i.e. is in internal format, and I run 
my algorithm it gets the correct results, taking 115.1 seconds.

2. BUT, if just before the algorithm is run, I do a textEncode(tStr, 
"UTF8") , it gets the correct results (identical to the above), but in 
only 3.3 seconds.

The code, in a zip file containing the test stack, SpellCheck Library, 
and the 'bible' and "war&peace" sample textfiles, can be downloaded from


if anyone wants to look at it.


On 03/09/2021 13:38, Alex Tweedly via use-livecode wrote:
> On 03/09/2021 11:07, David V Glasgow via use-livecode wrote:
>> Alex states that put textEncode(tWHoleText, "UTF8") into tWholeText 
>> speeds replace up, but David B says LC internal format is UTF16.  
>> Doesn’t the 8 vs 16 difference matter?  Or matters less than other 
>> encodings?
> I would regard that timing comparison with much suspicion. I was 
> textEncoding() it inappropriately - I had just read it in from a file, 
> so I *should* have been textDecoding() it. Therefore it is unclear 
> whether the times I was seeing then are meaningful.
> Alex.
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

More information about the use-livecode mailing list