>>I suspect that the removing an object has to rearrange collection properties like controls() and objects() and the larger the number of objects, the more time it takes. This would explain the exponential increase of time needed when large numbers of objects exist.
>
>If this is the case, would manually storing a reference to the objects in instantiation order, and then removing them in that order save some time?
For testing this issue I yesterday built a routine that scans through the objects (using AMEMBERS), puts the info in a table and uses that (ordered) table to remove them, first the youngest child then its parent, then its parent, etc. There was no gain. On the contrary, the two phases together (data collection and removing) were more time consuming.
However, removing certain (known) parents did improve performance.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
