Subject: Re: [boost] [sort] Timsort review reminder
From: Steven Ross (spreadsort_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-06-07 10:54:13
On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 6:33 AM Niall Douglas via Boost <
> On 06/06/2017 16:40, Zach Laine via Boost wrote:
> > Please provide a link to online documentation, if if one exists. All
> > been able to find so far is a paper and Doxygen reference docs. I got
> > much by cloning the GitHub repo (putting docs online somewhere will get
> > a lot more reviewers :). Did I miss it somewhere?
> I see the pull request implements no documentation page matching
> nor modifying it. Some doxygen comment documentation can be found at:
Here is some documentation on Timsort:
1. Wiki <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timsort>
2. brief description in python dev list
3. Original implementation <https://github.com/gfx/cpp-TimSort>
Francisco and I are in the middle of rewriting the docs for the Sort
library. Integrating Timsort in there once done will be relatively simple.
> I'll be honest here: I personally would have felt this pull request
> better reviewed and handled by Boost.Sort's maintainer. It's too small
> and limited for a full fat review by the entire community unless there
> is something very controversial about it and the maintainer feels the
> community needs to invest a week into thinking about this.
I would prefer a mini-review myself (as I agreed to do when adding new
algorithms to the collection).but Ronald suggested I do a full review. My
main questions are: Does anyone care about Timsort?
Will Alexander maintain the source and answer questions about it?
If you don't care about Timsort, you don't need to review it.
> ned Productions Limited Consulting
> http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/
> Unsubscribe & other changes: