RB unclear couldyetbewinner in speedwhatfor microtest :-)

[Monte Goulding]

> > 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

Well the realbasic script (if I'm reading correctly which it's possible I'm
not) just lists any phrases that have a match somewhere which is what the
rev script is doing. From what I can see it splits the phrase list into an
array and deletes any elements that aren't in the body text.

> or, as Monte so nicely put it on reading the book, why we are doing
> this anyway.

Yes... my comment was mainly meant to infer that this is still likely not
the data that would be used in the resultant application and therefore any
results for any development environment might not be representative of
reality.

Cheers

Monte