<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for It&#039;s Not A Bug, It&#039;s A Feature</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.summit-pro.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.summit-pro.com</link>
	<description>Just another Developer weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 May 2011 20:27:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Classic ASP String Builder Class by Greg R.</title>
		<link>http://www.summit-pro.com/blog/2010/06/09/classic-asp-string-builder-class/comment-page-1/#comment-83</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg R.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2011 20:27:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.summit-pro.com/?p=163#comment-83</guid>
		<description>Good points Wiersma, I will look at changing it up a bit as suggested.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good points Wiersma, I will look at changing it up a bit as suggested.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Classic ASP String Builder Class by Wiersma</title>
		<link>http://www.summit-pro.com/blog/2010/06/09/classic-asp-string-builder-class/comment-page-1/#comment-82</link>
		<dc:creator>Wiersma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 09:48:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.summit-pro.com/?p=163#comment-82</guid>
		<description>Nice. Microsoft also has a VB component that does the same, and causes less memory  fragmentation 

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms972323.aspx

I think the classic asp version faster because no calls to com objects are involved.


Question: Why Append ByVal and Not ByRef? Doesn&#039;t ByRef save creation of one string object?
Also, For my site I changed the fixed growthrate of 10 to a relative growth of 25%

Also, I wonder if UBound doesn&#039;t slow it down a little. Perhaps better store the size of the array in a member variable?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice. Microsoft also has a VB component that does the same, and causes less memory  fragmentation </p>
<p><a href="http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms972323.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms972323.aspx</a></p>
<p>I think the classic asp version faster because no calls to com objects are involved.</p>
<p>Question: Why Append ByVal and Not ByRef? Doesn&#8217;t ByRef save creation of one string object?<br />
Also, For my site I changed the fixed growthrate of 10 to a relative growth of 25%</p>
<p>Also, I wonder if UBound doesn&#8217;t slow it down a little. Perhaps better store the size of the array in a member variable?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Multi Dimensional Dictionary Object in Classic ASP by Greg R.</title>
		<link>http://www.summit-pro.com/blog/2010/05/06/multi-dimensional-dictionary-object-in-classic-asp/comment-page-1/#comment-80</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg R.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Dec 2010 17:23:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.summit-pro.com/?p=63#comment-80</guid>
		<description>Hi Chris, Try wrapping the Exists call like Cbool(Dict.Exists(&quot;test&quot;, &quot;1&quot;)) and see if it returns true or false. I just tried a test and I was able to get a false from requesting a non existent value</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Chris, Try wrapping the Exists call like Cbool(Dict.Exists(&#8220;test&#8221;, &#8220;1&#8243;)) and see if it returns true or false. I just tried a test and I was able to get a false from requesting a non existent value</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

