Avoid using 'network sort' (a misnomer) in sort.cc, the correct term is 'sorting networks'.
gcc/ChangeLog: * sort.cc: Use 'sorting networks' in comments. --- gcc/sort.cc | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/gcc/sort.cc b/gcc/sort.cc index 9a0113fb62f..feef345830c 100644 --- a/gcc/sort.cc +++ b/gcc/sort.cc @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3. If not see - deterministic (but not necessarily stable) - fast, especially for common cases (0-5 elements of size 8 or 4) - The implementation uses a network sort for up to 5 elements and + The implementation uses sorting networks for up to 5 elements and a merge sort on top of that. Neither stage has branches depending on comparator result, trading extra arithmetic for branch mispredictions. */ @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ struct sort_ctx char *out; // output buffer size_t n; // number of elements size_t size; // element size - size_t nlim; // limit for network sort + size_t nlim; // limit for using sorting networks }; /* Like sort_ctx, but for use with qsort_r-style comparators. Several @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ cmp1 (char *e0, char *e1, sort_ctx *c) return x & (c->cmp (e0, e1) >> 31); } -/* Execute network sort on 2 to 5 elements from IN, placing them into C->OUT. +/* Apply a sorting network to 2 to 5 elements from IN, placing them into C->OUT. IN may be equal to C->OUT, in which case elements are sorted in place. */ template<typename sort_ctx> static void -- 2.33.0