| [03-02 11:00] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: looks like i overlooked 1 minor thing |
| [03-02 11:00] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: ok reuploaded new code wih fix any issues let me know |
| [03-02 11:01] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: was in a wired spot that my testing didnt catch |
| [03-02 11:01] | [Chat] | No: you were right however, 'An ogre did it' |
| [03-02 11:01] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: nah i did trying to fix othe rbugs i created the new one ;P |
| [03-02 11:01] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: so 100% my fault |
| [03-02 11:01] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: was simple imstake i missed in the jumble of code |
| [03-02 11:01] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: and wher it was it was not hit in my testing |
| [03-02 11:02] | [Chat] | No: on the flipside it sort of forced me to hack and slash this morning, so I'm at least 20M xp better than before. |
| [03-02 11:02] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: should be fixed now |
| [03-02 11:02] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: awnays if should be fixed now if it breaks still let me know |
| [03-02 11:03] | [Chat] | No: will test in a second |
| [03-02 11:03] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: i tested it but again never can be sure with my luck |
| [03-02 11:04] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: as its a simple change that reduces cpu time by a good 50 to 900% depending on the call |
| [03-02 11:04] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: as it is men to cache filtered data |
| [03-02 11:04] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: so it doenst have to keep filtering it |
| [03-02 11:05] | [Chat] | Icewolfz debating on also filtering sorted data as an exrta step but that would have probabloul taken more memory |
| [03-02 11:05] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: didnt see as much of a reduction in time between sorting and filtering |
| [03-02 11:05] | [Chat] | No: might be a good thing to make optional via argument in the future |
| [03-02 11:06] | [Chat] | Icewolfz: that is not possible due ot design |
|
| Back to List |
