You may be missing a few recursive calls there :-)
Indeed.
I'm confused. Is this a legitimate stable quicksort, or not? (My guess is, it is indeed legit as written.) This was also the first I have heard of stability as a sort property. http://perldoc.perl.org/sort.html may shed some light on this... "A stable sort means that for records that compare equal, the original input ordering is preserved. Mergesort is stable, quicksort is not. " Is this description a fair characterization of stability for the current discussion? I'm a bit confused but if I understand correctly sort from the prelude is non stable quicksort, which has O(k n^2) as the worst case, whereas stable quicksort has O( k* log n + n). non-stable quicksort is just sort from the prelude: qsort [] = [] qsort (x:xs) = qsort (filter (< x) xs) ++ [x] ++ qsort (filter (>= x) xs) If any in the above was incorrect, please holler. 2007/4/12, Stefan O'Rear <stefanor@cox.net>:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2007 at 09:20:12PM -0700, Tim Chevalier wrote:
On 4/11/07, Stefan O'Rear <stefanor@cox.net> wrote:
If you want to be really explicit about it, here is a sort that will work:
sort [] = [] sort l@(x:_) = filter (<x) l ++ filter (==x) l ++ filter (>x) l
(A stable quicksort, btw)
You may be missing a few recursive calls there :-)
Indeed.
Stefan _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe