mergesort. Reply

[Serge D. Mechveliani]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 09:44:11AM +0200, Ketil Z. Malde wrote:

> "Serge D. Mechveliani" <mechvel@botik.ru> writes:
> 
> > But        sortBy' (compare) [1 .. n]
> 
> > costs too much, even for  n = 11000.
> > It costs (on worst data) many times more than  mergeSort.    
> 
> Yes, but why do you want to sort sorted data?  
> 
> [..]

quickSort  will loose much for many data which are `almost' sorted.
To detect fast which data are bad for qucikSort, you will, probably, 
need  mergeSort ...

-----------------
Serge Mechveliani
mechvel@botik.ru