From: Matthew Kerwin <lists@...>
Date: 2013-06-14T07:45:21+09:00
Subject: Re: Timsort in Ruby

Alphonse 23 wrote in post #1112359:
> So that's Ruby's sorting function... It doesn't even look like it's
> checking the size of the array before sorting. Does this mean, quicksort
> is used no matter what the size of the array. So even when I'm sorting
> 10 elements, it's using quicksort?
>
> Ruby's quicksort function is 207 lines. Timsort is 1301 lines of C.
> http://code.google.com/p/timsort/source/browse/trunk/timsort.c
>
> Shouldn't the Ruby community feel ashamed that Python has a more
> optimized sorting function?

So you're saying More SLOC = More Optimised?  That's quite an arbitrary
benchmark.

If the performance of Ruby core's sorting is shameful to you, write a
gem.  And I really do mean that, the option is available, and it's a
good way to eventually promote functionality into core.  I'd be
interested myself, if timsort didn't apparently require me to write and
maintain 1300 lines of code.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.