Path: csiph.com!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end
From: w.clodius@icloud.com (William Clodius)
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Subject: Re: sorting performance, Add nested-function support in a language the based on a stack-machine
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 23:25:21 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 13
Sender: news@iecc.com
Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com
Message-ID: <18-03-096@comp.compilers>
References: <6effed5e-6c90-f5f4-0c80-a03c61fd2127@gkc.org.uk> <18-03-042@comp.compilers> <18-03-047@comp.compilers> <18-03-075@comp.compilers> <18-03-077@comp.compilers> <18-03-090@comp.compilers>
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="56193"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: performance, comment
Posted-Date: 25 Mar 2018 06:46:11 EDT
X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com
X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com
X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com
Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:2025

Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> wrote:

> <snip>> [Give or take the detail that bubble sort is never the right algorithm
> since insertion sort is shorter and faster, I agree. -John]

I believe that bubble sort is faster if the data is usually presorted.
The Unicode consortium describes the sorting of codepoints to forn the
normalization forms, because the initial decomposition process usually
results in an ordering that is usually in or close to the desired order.

[It's the reverse.  Insertion sort is O(N) if the list is already sorted.
See http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-bubble-sort-and-vs-insertion-sort/
-John]