Ross Ridge wrote: > David G. Wonnacott wrote: > > Couldn't we easily get an n*log(n) shuffle... > > Why are you trying to get an O(n*log(n)) shuffle when an O(n) shuffle > algorithim is well known and implemented in Python as random.shuffle()?
I think David is referring to this: "don't you still need to use O(log(n)) time to find and remove the item from the collection?" The answer for him is no: as far as I know, the Python list is a random-access structure, so looking up 2 items and swapping them runs in constant time. You perform that N times to shuffle the sequence, so it runs in O(N). -- Ben Sizer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
