Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.c > #397455
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Date | 2026-04-10 01:31 +0300 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <20260410013139.000059d4@yahoo.com> (permalink) |
| References | <10otm7r$1ntrg$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> <86mrzfxvv5.fsf@linuxsc.com> <10r35bp$29m9s$1@paganini.bofh.team> <863416xid5.fsf@linuxsc.com> <10r94t2$or8$1@reader1.panix.com> |
On Thu, 9 Apr 2026 21:15:14 -0000 (UTC) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote: > In article <863416xid5.fsf@linuxsc.com>, > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > >antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) writes: > > > >> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes: > >>> > >>>> On Mon, 06 Apr 2026 15:13:32 -0700 > >>>> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Obviously what words (or lines) appear can affect the character > >>>>> counts, but that still doesn't change BigO. By the way you > >>>>> don't say whether you are sorting words or lines. > >>>> > >>>> This sub-thread is about sorting lines with average length of few > >>>> dozens characters, i.e. many times longer than log2(N). That was > >>>> stated at one of earlier posts. > >>> > >>> That has nothing to do with BigO, which is about asymptotic > >>> behavior as N goes to infinity. > >> > >> Honest Big(O) varies length of the key with N. In practical range > >> key length may be constant, but fixing length gives unrealistic > >> problem for Big(O) analysis: without varying key length there are > >> finitely many keys and sorting is equivalent to counting how many > >> times each key appears in the input. > > > >There's an important clarification to make here. There are two > >independent parameters: N, the number of records to be sorted (a > >record being a character string that is either a word or a line), > >and the (maximum) length of any record, which in the discussion is > >bounded above by a constant. > > > >What is being asked about is the behavior as a function of N as N > >increases without bound. Of course, theoretically, as the number of > >records increases without bound, eventually the character strings > >being sorted will have to have duplicates. But long before that > >happens the index variable N will run out of bits. This property is > >well understood in theoretical computer science, not just in terms > >of how much time is used but how much storage is needed. In theory > >log N bits are needed just to hold the index pointers. It is > >customary though, outside of purely theoretical discussions, to > >ignore that and treat the size of an index or pointer variable as > >constant. In purely theoretical terms no sorting algorithm is > >O(N*log(N)), because just incrementing a pointer takes more than > >O(1) operations. Surely the discussions in Knuth's books take such > >things into consideration. > > If by "Knuth's books" you're referring to TAOCP, then he does > not seem to give it too much attention. At the start of Volume > 3, he spends considerable time discussing the combinatorics of > permutations as prefatory to discussing sorting, but if he talks > about the complexity of key comparison at all, it's not an > extended treatment. He refers to a "<" operation for comparing > keys, and he does talk about "multiprecision keys" and > lexiographic orderings, but doesn't spend a lot of ink talking > about how it might be implemented; one of the exercises > acknowledges that this can have a significant impact on > performance, but doesn't go into much detail. Another excise > challenges the reader to write a MIX program for comparing keys, > but again, doesn't give details about complexity analysis _of > comparison_. There is another exercise that talks about this > tangentially, in which he suggests sorting (it's kind of implied > of text data) slows down as the sort nears completion, since > more and more of the key value is now the same, and suggests > keeping track of the length of the common prefix to use as an > offset for subsequent comparisons. > > I have seen the notion that the actual time required for > individual operations should be taken into account when > analyzing their time complexity does appear in other books; > Dasgupta, Papadimitriou, and Vazirani > (http://algorithmics.lsi.upc.edu/docs/Dasgupta-Papadimitriou-Vazirani.pdf) > talk about this in the context of computing Fibonacci numbers, > for example. > > >On the practical side, which almost > >always covers discussions that take place in usenet newsgroups, > >these minor theoretical issues are ignored. Any actul computer in > >the physical universe will never have occasion to process more than > >2**512 records, due to the limitation of the number of elementary > >particles in the universe, so a 512-bit address (or index value) > >always suffices. > > > >So yes, in theory, the considerations around processing an enormous > >number of values are relevant. In the practical context of the > >discussion underway here, they aren't. > > Indeed. As Rob Pike once put it, "Fancy algorithms are slow > when $n$ is small, and $n$ is usually small. Fancy algorithms > have big constants. Until you know that $n$ is frequently going > to get big, don't get fancy." > > - Dan C. > One case where these considerations are not at all theoretical and where simple quicksort from the books performs very very slowly exactly because when sorting progresses each lexicographic comparison takes more and more time, is a sorting at core of Burrows–Wheeler transform, which in turn is at core of various compression schemes, including bzip2. The problem hits you the worst when data set compresses well. In specific case of bzip2, they limited block size to 900KB which is quite low and did preprocessing on input data which often seriously impacts the quality of compression. I can't say for sure, but it seems to me that the reason was exactly that - avoiding prohibitively slow sorting. Were they had time and desire to use "fancy algorithms", either combinations of bucket and non-bucket variants of radix sort, or quicksort that memorizes common prefixes, or even combination of all three, then they would not need to use preprocessing and small blocks and would end up with better compression ratios.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 16:11 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 06:01 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 01:49 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 07:23 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 02:58 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 07:52 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 07:53 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 03:05 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 08:10 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 03:17 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 08:59 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 09:12 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-14 12:15 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 14:00 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 16:43 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-16 20:57 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:07 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-17 00:49 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 05:21 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-18 12:40 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 17:06 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-18 15:46 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 22:14 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-19 22:39 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-18 16:14 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-19 22:42 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-17 14:46 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-16 22:26 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-16 22:35 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:09 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-16 23:17 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:21 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-16 23:34 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-17 00:09 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 21:45 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-17 10:42 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 13:04 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-03-17 12:17 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 12:31 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 21:27 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-16 22:26 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-16 19:41 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 00:29 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 05:38 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 11:47 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-17 13:08 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-17 12:37 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 02:40 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-18 11:21 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 10:49 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 15:10 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-18 21:20 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-18 23:13 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 13:23 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-18 11:20 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 21:57 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-18 22:01 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-19 10:43 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 12:23 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-19 15:22 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-19 15:07 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 04:16 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 02:14 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:38 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:06 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:27 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:22 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-21 02:25 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-19 16:13 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 17:41 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 04:01 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-20 08:35 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:47 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 14:42 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:39 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-22 08:33 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-20 17:10 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-21 02:53 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-20 22:35 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-21 14:42 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:57 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 12:32 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:50 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-21 15:39 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-22 15:48 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-22 23:04 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-19 13:28 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 03:45 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 11:19 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-19 10:49 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-19 14:09 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-19 14:49 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 17:09 +0200
sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 17:29 +0200
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-19 18:33 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-19 21:40 +0200
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-19 23:53 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-20 00:15 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 05:05 +0100
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 12:58 +0200
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 12:53 +0100
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 13:13 +0100
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-20 13:26 +0100
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 15:08 +0200
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-20 13:43 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 15:51 +0200
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2026-03-20 14:47 +0100
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-22 02:03 +0200
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 04:03 +0100
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 15:13 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 02:22 +0300
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 21:00 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 09:37 +0300
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 21:54 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-09 16:06 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-11 09:04 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-11 19:55 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-07 14:46 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 20:04 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-09 21:15 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-10 01:31 +0300
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-12 06:17 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-11 21:32 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-12 04:59 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-04-09 23:33 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-10 11:35 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-12 07:13 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-13 20:44 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-25 15:47 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 14:01 +0200
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 13:48 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 01:58 +0300
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-04-07 01:02 +0100
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 08:01 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-03-19 23:21 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-06 18:37 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-20 04:33 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-20 14:24 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-22 05:06 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-03-22 09:30 +0200
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-07 02:12 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-07 14:00 +0300
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-16 10:23 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-04-07 16:39 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-12 11:16 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-25 00:45 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-17 06:25 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-20 01:33 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-20 07:42 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2026-03-20 12:16 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-14 16:22 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 18:04 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-14 17:39 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 19:25 +0100
csiph-web