Raymond Hettinger <raymond.hettin...@gmail.com> added the comment: Everyone here should heed Tim's comments. The statistics module already has a history of suboptimal decisions made in the service of theoretical perfection (i.e. mean(seq) is over a 100x slower than fsum(seq)/len(seq)).
While variants of quick-select have a nice O(n) theoretical time, the variability is very-high and has really bad worst cases. The existing sort() is unbelievably fast, has a reasonable worst case, exploits existing order to great advantage, has nice cache performance, and has become faster still with the recently added type-specialized comparisons. This sets a very high bar for any proposed patches. ---------- nosy: +rhettinger _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue21592> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com