On 07/11/2013 05:17 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > Unstable sort should be faster than stable sort. If I remember correctly (1) > our > TimSort is indeed slower than quicksort on random numbers, (2) there is a > performance bug that makes our quicksort perform quadratically on data that's > essentially sorted but has one unsorted element at the end. Is that the case?
That's _exactly_ the case here. :-\ Thanks for the clarification!
