Missed the list... ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Isiah Meadows <isiahmead...@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 07:42 Subject: Re: stable sort proposal To: Vic99999 <vic99...@yandex.ru>
What about the Timsort? It's used in Android's Java implementation, as well as Python since 2.3. I don't know that much about the performance aspects of it outside it requiring O(n) memory (compared to QuickSort's O(log n)) and being adaptive (QuickSort is not). On Tue, Mar 15, 2016, 00:00 Vic99999 <vic99...@yandex.ru> wrote: > @Tab Atkins Jr., > > The only question is how much slower/more expensiver stable sorting is > than unstable sorting, and whether that cost is sufficient to outweigh the > usefulness of a stable sort. > My own experiment shows, that QuickSort (unstable) is ~20% (or more) > faster on "random" array of integers (a good case for QuickSort). Probably, > there are many Chrome users who sort large integer arrays, and so Chrome > devs will never switch to a stable sort. (see comments at > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=90 ) > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
