
28 Jun
2002
28 Jun
'02
8:32 a.m.
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