Subject: Re: [boost] [sort] Parallel sorting sub-library mini-review conclusion
From: Francisco JosÃ© Tapia (fjtapia_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-11-22 03:47:21
I am agree with all the points.
I would like to know the memory used and the best,normal and worst case of
the Asynchronous sorting algorithms.
I must study in deep QuickBook for unify the documentation of the project
2016-11-22 3:16 GMT+01:00 Steven Ross <spreadsort_at_[hidden]>:
> The Boost.Sort parallel sorting sub-library mini-review is now complete.
> There was interest expressed in using this library, and all complaints
> about its ability to work were corrected.
> For that reason, I'm going to accept it into the Boost.Sort library,
> subject to these conditions:
> 1. Francisco should investigate the reverse-sorted data optimization and
> see if he can integrate it without significantly impacting performance
> other data sets.
> 2. Francisco should investigate why Asynchronous quick_intro_sort
> outperforms Boost parallel sort, and consider adopting the techniques or
> source of that library call with Christophe's permission.
> 3. We need to integrate the documentation with the rest of Boost.Sort so
> that it works properly with QuickBook, and the documentation will need
> 4. Francisco will maintain the Parallel sorting sub-library.
> Thanks for all the feedback from participants, and Congratulations
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk