Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!stanford.edu!unix!hplabs!hpfcso!hpfcbig!diamant
From: diamant@hpfcbig.SDE.HP.COM (John Diamant)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.handhelds
Subject: Re: Summary of 'Good Ways to...'
Message-ID: <1010016@hpfcbig.SDE.HP.COM>
Date: 3 May 91 19:51:51 GMT
References: <1991Apr29.174413.5473@rick.cs.ubc.ca>
Organization: HP SESD, Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 36

george chow (b3300876@rick.cs.ubc.ca) writes:

> and got the following: 
> 	VNUMTABLE	29.9 sec 
> 	VTABLE1		24.0 sec 
> 	VTABLE2		23.6 sec 
> 	VML		0.133 sec 

This is great.  The VML routine sounds like it makes this sort of thing
practical for large searches (the other ones are all out of the question
for a search of a phone directory).

> Thanks for all the responses. Just FEI, I needed these routine for my own 
> address book program. (I know, I know, this is probably the n-th version 
> being written for the 48 but I didn't like the ones I've seen...)

The one I use is a general database program called DB by Ross Barnes.
Except for the slow search times and fact that it doesn't alphabetize,
I'm pretty happy with it.  I did modify it to only search the first
field (assuming it's the key) rather than all fields when finding a
listing (this has the name in an address book database and is usually
what you're searching for).  I'll probably add the VML uppercasing
routing since it shouldn't affect performance very much.  Anyway, I'd be
curious to know what it is you don't like about any of the existing
address book programs.  Please post your thoughts on what you would like
to see different in them.


John Diamant
Software Engineering Systems Division
Hewlett Packard Co.		ARPA Internet: diamant@hpfclp.sde.hp.com
Fort Collins, CO		UUCP:  {hpfcla,hplabs}!hpfclp!diamant

This response does not represent the official position of, or statement
by, the Hewlett-Packard Company.  The above data is provided for informational
purposes only.  It is supplied without warranty of any kind.