/prog/ - sort rant

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 20:55

Seriously... why can't we just do things ONE WAY? All these different types of sorts, for no reason at all except to get a faster running time with programs made for computers that won't even NOTICE the difference between a selection or merge sort. So what if heap sort has a constant O(n log n) time? I don't care! So stop assigning me stupid CS labs telling me to figure out different sorts.
All this from a high school APCS student...

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 21:10

>high school

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 21:57

Something tells me that >>1-2 are the same person and WHBT constantly

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:00

Neone here got a slab allocator that i could borrow plz ?thx

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:08

>>3
Guess what? They're not...

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:10

>>1-6
Only one person on /prog/.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:37

I understand IHBT, but I still want to respond.

You see, [spoiler][b]FORCED INDENTATION OF THE CODE.[/spoiler]

THREAD OVER.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:48

>>7
ARRRRGGGGHHHH
[b][u]RAGE/u][/b]

_FO^{RC^ED} _{_INDENT}^{AT^IO}_{_n} OF THE ^{^{^{^CO}D}E}

~~THREAD OVER.~~

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-09 2:19

>>8

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 11:14

>>1
Only radixsort and quicksort (and heapsort as an alternative to quicksort) are relevant. All the other sorting algorithms are only taught for the sake of having students understand how to analyze algorythms. You're not being taught "sorting algorithms," you're being taught how to analyze worst-cases, understand Big O notation, etc. You'll never fucking use bubble sort anywhere, moron, but knowing this sort of shit is what tells an ENTERPRISE JAVA PROGRAMMER apart from an EXPERT PROGRAMMER.

IHBT, right?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 16:59

>>10
YHBT

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:22

>>10
how to analyze algorythms.
RYTHM?!
EURYTHMICS!?!?!
SWEET DREAMS ARE MADE OF THIS

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:27

>>12
back to /b/, please.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:35

>>12
who am I to disagree?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:37

>>12
Lastest Firefox nightly broke my spellchecker. Missed that one.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:45

^{Lastest Firefox nightly broke my spellchecker. Missed that one.}
Lastest Firefox nightly
Lastest

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:49

>>15
This is why spellcheckers and syntax highlighting makes people stupid.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:53

>>17
Agreed.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

>>18
A greed.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

>>19
It's a kinda greed.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

>>20
It's a kinda greeed.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:57

>>20
It's a kinda greed. Greed. Greed. [b]GREEEEEED!!!![/b]

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:04

>>22
Suddenly I have the urge to play the Addams Family pinball game...

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:07

>>23
One word: Wednesday from the Addams Family movie. _^_^

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:13

>>22
Did the lastest Firefox nightly break your BBC^ode checker too?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:14

>>25
Would you be so kind to /r/ your checker, thanks.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:27

>>26
I will not request my checker, no. I already have it!

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 19:24

>>27
I want a checker plz halp me :]

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 19:27

>>16
YHBT.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 1:18

Bubblesort is actually faster than quicksort in datasets which you know are "almost sorted".

So never say never.

... to be honest I've never actually run into this situation.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 1:40

>>20,21
^{_{^_kinda}}
_{^_kinda}
^_kinda
_kinda
KINDA

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 3:52

>>1
Runtime isn't the only thing that matters ... when you enter college CS, you'll learn all about the wonderful world of space analysis, cache locality, and memory-efficient algorithms. Hopefully.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 4:32

why don't you want your programs to run faster?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 5:59

void sort(uintmax_t *numbers, size_t length){

 uintmax_t temp[length], *arrays[2] = {numbers, temp};

 for(uint_fast8_t i = 0; i < sizeof(uintmax_t) * CHAR_BIT; ++i){

  for(size_t j = 0, start = 0, end = length - 1; j < length; ++j){

   if(!(arrays[i & 1][j] & 1 << i))

    arrays[i & 1 ^ 1][start++] = arrays[i & 1][j];

   if(arrays[i & 1][length - j - 1] & 1 << i)

    arrays[i & 1 ^ 1][end--] = arrays[i & 1][length - j - 1];

}}}

O(n) time, O(n) space, and the whole thing is only 8 lines of code.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 6:19

>>34
}}}
Holy fuck.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 6:24

>>35
it's better than ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))...

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 7:17

>>34
what am i looking at here?

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

>>37
Lisp.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

>>34
}}}
That's some punchline right there.

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

>>34,35
By the way, those {} for the for statements are not needed.

sort rant

1 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 20:55

2 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 21:10

3 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 21:57

4 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:00

5 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:08

6 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:10

7 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:37

8 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:48

9 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-09 2:19

10 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 11:14

11 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 16:59

12 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:22

13 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:27

14 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:35

15 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:37

16 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:45

17 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:49

18 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:53

19 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

20 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

21 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

22 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:57

23 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:04

24 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:07

25 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:13

26 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:14

27 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:27

28 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 19:24

29 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 19:27

30 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 1:18

31 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 1:40

32 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 3:52

33 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 4:32

34 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 5:59

35 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 6:19

36 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 6:24

37 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 7:17

38 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

39 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

40 Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 20:55

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 21:10

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 21:57

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:00

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:08

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:10

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:37

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-08 22:48

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-09 2:19

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 11:14

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 16:59

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:22

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:27

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:35

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:37

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:45

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:49

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:53

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:56

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 17:57

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:04

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:07

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:13

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:14

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 18:27

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 19:24

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-10 19:27

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 1:18

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 1:40

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 3:52

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 4:32

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 5:59

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 6:19

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 6:24

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 7:17

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20

Name: Anonymous 2008-04-12 8:20