On 30 Aug 2002, Felix Geerinckx wrote: > This if for a seven-element array. > > I did some testing myself for larger array sizes (times are in > CPU seconds): > > Size Loop Sort > 1000 0.00 0.01 > 10000 0.02 0.08 > 100000 0.13 1.03 > 200000 0.24 2.18 > 300000 0.37 3.35 > > So if you have more than 1000 numbers, the loop method will already > be faster. In addition, it has the advantage that you don't need all > the numbers to be present in memory, since you can calculate min/max > while you read the numbers from file. > > For small array sizes, it doesn't matter which method you use, since > the cpu time will be near zero anyway. For larger sizes it does > matter, and the loop method is a clear winner. > Therefor, imho, your suggestion in March (and mine now :-) to use a > loop, is *always* preferable.
I thought on similar lines too when that thread was on, but I convinced myself saying that an unsorted array of 1000 or more elements in your code is a poor design to start with :-) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
