Boost logo

Boost :

From: Hervé Brönnimann (hervebronnimann_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-11 13:43:03

I did this a while ago and was surprised that it wasn't faster than
std::sort, or even the plain old-fashioned quicksort. I am talking
about POD (int, double - which by the way are ordered numerically by
reinterpreting as char[8] and applying radix sort with the
appropriate endianness), but also strings (with a generalization of
radix sort, either top-down or bottom-up).

It seemed to me that in order to really make such a library as a
replacement for std:sort for POD types whose comparison gives the
same result as the bit-wise comparison, there would need to be quite
some template meta-programming (using type_traits and worrying about
big/small endian) and the result wouldn't be guaranteed to be much
better. I'd love to be proved wrong...

All in all, although an interesting project, I think there is little
point to it since std::sort is already good enough and surprisingly
hard to beat.

Good luck,

On Mar 10, 2007, at 9:26 PM, Sam Schetterer wrote:

> Is anyone interested in a sorting library with optimized radixsorts,
> quicksorts, radix quicksorts, and mergesorts?
> _________________________________________________________________
> Mortgage rates as low as 4.625% - Refinance $150,000 loan for $579
> a month.
> Intro*Terms
> 2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f6&disc=y&vers=743&s=40
> 56&p=5117
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> listinfo.cgi/boost

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at