2013/10/5 Rob <robpill...@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 05:45:56PM +0400, Alexander S. wrote:
>> 2013/10/4 Raphaël Proust <raphla...@gmail.com>:
>> If we want to retain this patch, I'd suggest reversing array after
>> sorting, not multiplying by `sortorder' in comparison functions. This
>> avoids code duplication.
>
> I disagree - rather than adding a sort call and changing the program's
> runtime complexity, can't we just reduce the amount of lines _and_
> duplication like this:
Reversing an array we just sorted isn't adding complexity, it's O(n)
adding to O(n log n).

Reply via email to