Posted by Jeckyl on 01/21/07 21:00

> Oh wait, PARTIAL bad on my end. When I was rewriting the code (or
> rather when my code was rewriting my code) I overlooked a small detail
> and the primary reason it was running so slowly was because it was
> adding ALL the data to ONE variable (where as currently it spans it
> out in 192 variables). So actually Bumbles current method is a bit
> faster, about 4 seconds faster. I know, I know, what a BLAZING speed
> difference...oh, but uh...there's still ~one~ lil problem...
> http://www.backwater-productions.net/_images/_Usenet/Bumbled_By_Bumbles.png
>
> A lil step up from just a plain solid black nothingness...I mean at
> least Bumble's method was able to do SOMETHING...albeit a random
> splattering of incoherent colored pixels. *shrugs*
>
> Looks like ya STILL lose, Bumbles. Tsch, tsch, tsch...

I'm not the one losing here :)

Its sounds like there may be something else not quite right in your code
then. If you supply your SWI file, I could have a look for you .. or at
least post your code here..
--
Jeckyl

[Back to original message]