Re: [boost] [review] [sort] Sort library review manager results

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] [sort] Sort library review manager results
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-11-28 10:19:16

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Steven Ross
> Sent: 28 November 2014 12:55
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [review] [sort] Sort library review manager results

 > One possible way to handle classic algorithms is to integrate them with
> the tests I wrote for Spreadsort, and verify they show a significant benefit
relative to
> the existing libraries for some subset of realistic cases and don't have any
major
> bugs.  Then a mini-review of the the API and documentation might be
appropriate.

+1

> Here are some potential standard algorithms that it might be nice to add in
the
> future:

> LSD radix sort, for fixed-length data where stability matters Timsort, a
stable
> comparison sort that is fast for mostly-sorted data and is used by standard
Java
> implementations.

> A sorting network based comparison sort for small and fixed-size datasets.
> I've found these to be about twice as fast as Insertionsort.

> k-way merge parallel sort

Yes - go for it - these special-case sorts will be invaluable for some.

Paul

---
Paul A. Bristow
Prizet Farmhouse
Kendal UK LA8 8AB
[phone]