> Non-comparison sorts are a useful technique, but it's changing the > problem, and they are only useful in very limited circumstances. There's > a good reason that most sort routines are based on O(n*log n) comparison > sorts instead of O(n) bucket sorts or radix sorts. > This is an assumption that I never quite understood. What most people want is to have sorted data, they don't care if I used a sorting or non-sorting comparison to do it. I think it is just that in most cases n is not very big anyway and comparison sorts make it easier on the programmer to create arbitrary types that are sortable. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with comple... Arnaud Delobelle
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with co... David Hláčik
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with complexity... Lie Ryan
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with complexity... greg
- Re: stable algorithm with complexity ... Aaron Brady
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with complexity... Steven D'Aprano
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with comple... Roy Smith
- Re: stable algorithm with complex... Aaron Brady
- Re: stable algorithm with co... David Cournapeau
- Re: stable algorithm with co... Steven D'Aprano
- Re: stable algorithm wit... pruebauno
- Re: stable algorithm wit... pruebauno
- Re: stable algorithm wit... Dan Upton
- Re: stable algorithm wit... Terry Reedy
- Re: stable algorithm wit... cmdrrickhun...@yaho.com
- Re: stable algorithm wit... denisbz
- Re: stable algorithm wit... Dan Upton
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with co... Steven D'Aprano
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with comple... Lie Ryan
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with complexity O(n... MRAB
- Re: [OT] stable algorithm with complexity O(n) Wojciech Muła