On Monday, 23 June 2014 at 17:25:13 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Second, there are known reasons and setups where Timsort and
derivatives fare better than classic quicksort-based
implementations, and generalizing them into some magic "stable
sort is just better" umbrella argument is just odd. Timsort
works well on data with large continuous sorted runs, and
that's an important case but one that a quicksort-based
approach could and should avail itself of as well.
Note that unstable version of timsort can perform better on some
input, as you can use descendant runs (when only strictly
descendent are usable in the stable version).
