26 Jun
2002
26 Jun
'02
5:42 p.m.
ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil Z. Malde) writes:
for 90K values to sort, I get 7M string comparisons and 321M integer
..and with different parameters giving 127K values, ie. a factor of 1.4, I get 12M and 614M comparisons, *very* close to the expected O(n²) behavior of insertion sort.
The default definition of sortBy uses insertion sort
I have vague recollection of the wisdom of this choice being questioned
And now I think I'm about question it as well... -kzm (writing his own O(n log n) sortBy as we speak) -- If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants