Re: mergesort. Reply

On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 09:44:11AM +0200, Ketil Z. Malde wrote:

"Serge D. Mechveliani" writes:

...

But sortBy' (compare) [1 .. n]

...

costs too much, even for n = 11000. It costs (on worst data) many times more than mergeSort.

Yes, but why do you want to sort sorted data?

[..]

quickSort will loose much for many data which are `almost' sorted. To detect fast which data are bad for qucikSort, you will, probably, need mergeSort ... ----------------- Serge Mechveliani mechvel@botik.ru