Which may expected to be faster:

1. Using , as needed, e.g., Range, Cell and Cells objects to reference
cells.
2. Using Offset off of a Range object to reference a well established
pattern of cells.

It would seem that Offset should be faster, but is it?
Experiences?
References?

Typical expectation seems to be that reducing object "lookups" (ie. fewer
'dots' to get to the particular object) leads to better performance.

An example showing the two different methods you're considering would help.
Also -very easy to test...

Tim

"Howard Kaikow" wrote in message
...
Which may expected to be faster:

1. Using , as needed, e.g., Range, Cell and Cells objects to reference
cells.
2. Using Offset off of a Range object to reference a well established
pattern of cells.

It would seem that Offset should be faster, but is it?
Experiences?
References?

"Tim Williams" <timjwilliams at gmail dot com wrote in message
...
Typical expectation seems to be that reducing object "lookups" (ie. fewer
'dots' to get to the particular object) leads to better performance.

An example showing the two different methods you're considering would
help.
Also -very easy to test...

My expectation is that Offset would be faster because there would be less
object lookups/assignments.

Performance difference would depend on the particular algorithms used and
coding skills.