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

Reply via email to