[Haskell-cafe] (flawed?) benchmark : sort

[Krzysztof Skrzętnicki]

Thanks for improved code. My point was to measure which programming patterns
are faster than the others so I can learn which ones I should use. However,
the thing that is really bad is the fact, that even oneliner qsort_i is
faster than library sort. Which is very different from what I've expected.
My intuition is only best and fastest code goes to library, to the point
that people can learn from it. It seems I was mislead.


> It could probably be improved (with classics solution (better
> selection of the pivot...)), but the mergesort is only 3 times slower
> in worse case, and much more regular, if someone needs a faster sort
> in a specific case, it isn't hard to code.
>
> --
> Jedaï
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20080304/de3bdc0e/attachment.htm