Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #396916 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-03-12 07:24 +0100 |
| Last post | 2026-03-27 17:03 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 231 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Isn't that beauty ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 07:24 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 07:26 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 09:32 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 11:36 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 20:15 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 10:00 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 15:03 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) tTh <tth@none.invalid> - 2026-03-12 15:27 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 15:34 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 15:13 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 10:43 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:10 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 11:22 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:25 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:25 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:48 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-12 20:25 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 00:57 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 02:19 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 06:14 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:48 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:49 +0100
[OT] AI - questions and answers (was Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not)) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:27 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:59 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 21:22 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 06:15 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 06:48 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-14 03:29 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-12 16:44 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-12 17:32 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 00:56 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:54 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:14 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-12 16:18 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:06 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:27 +0100
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) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-26 07:29 -0700
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) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-27 02:04 +0000
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-04-26 22:27 -0700
Re: sorting Was: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) - 2026-04-27 14:41 +0000
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
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 00:54 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 00:31 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 06:24 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 01:40 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 01:34 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 14:38 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 15:31 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-15 13:15 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-16 15:18 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-23 21:23 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2026-03-13 18:47 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-15 14:38 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 07:24 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 01:51 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:54 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:29 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:33 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:57 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 11:58 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-13 14:29 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 08:08 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 04:19 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:53 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 09:56 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-13 05:10 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 10:14 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-13 17:32 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-13 18:44 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2026-03-13 19:36 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-03-14 06:03 +0100
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-03-12 16:56 +0000
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-20 23:07 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-22 16:55 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2026-03-26 20:08 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2026-03-27 00:35 -0400
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-03-26 21:53 -0700
Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2026-03-27 17:03 +0000
Page 6 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 12 Next page →
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 13:06 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pjd7p$1i7gl$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #397107 |
Am 20.03.2026 um 12:38 schrieb Janis Papanagnou: > But both are O(N log N), which is good to know. (And, frankly, > I wouldn't have expected any worse O(N^2) algorithm here.) Mergesort is always N(log N). Database server's don't use quicksort since it doesn't perform well it the items being sorted have a variable size; so they use quicksort, also because of it has very linear accesses, which is good for I/O. > [*] C++/STL has at least guarantees for the complexities. > For me that would basically suffice. I don't necessarily > need to know whether it's the concrete algorithm A or B. You're too compulsive.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 13:27 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pjeeq$1h0eh$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397111 |
On 2026-03-20 13:06, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 20.03.2026 um 12:38 schrieb Janis Papanagnou: > >> But both are O(N log N), which is good to know. (And, frankly, >> I wouldn't have expected any worse O(N^2) algorithm here.) > > Mergesort is always N(log N). Sure. - But you certainly meant O(N log N). But Mergesort was originally targeted to sort external data on sequential media (like tapes). For memory-internal sorting there's more advantageous algorithms. > Database server's don't use > quicksort since it doesn't perform well it the items being > sorted have a variable size; so they use quicksort, "don't use QS so they use QS"? - I think there's a typo in there. And I'm guessing you probably intended to say about the same what I said above.... > also > because of it has very linear accesses, which is good for > I/O. > >> [*] C++/STL has at least guarantees for the complexities. >> For me that would basically suffice. I don't necessarily >> need to know whether it's the concrete algorithm A or B. > > You're too compulsive. You think it's "compulsive" to *ignore* the internally used algorithm in libraries beyond knowing its complexity? - This sounds completely crude, but if you want to explain what you mean I'm interested. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 13:22 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <87tsua1cat.fsf@example.invalid> |
| In reply to | #397107 |
Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
> On 2026-03-20 10:14, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>> [...]
>>> Quicksort (as opposed to qsort() - where the details are not
>>> obvious) is certainly a case for computer science lectures;
>>> I'd only have hoped that these CS basics are broadly known,
>>> also with non-CS educated or the many amateur programmers.
>> [...]
>> C doesn't specify which algorithm qsort() uses. The name is almost
>> certainly derived from the name of the Quicksort algorithm, but the
>> C standard only says that the contents of the array are sorted.
>> A conforming but perverse implemention could use Bubblesort or
>> Bogosort.
>
> Yes, there's no [obvious] information; that's the dilemma![*]
I don't see a dilemma. qsort() sorts. No serious implementation is
going to use an algorithm with worse than O(n log n) performance.
>> Even the GNU libc documentation doesn't say what algorithm that
>> implementation uses. (In the source code, I see references to
>> mergesort and heapsort.)
>
> Though the use of Mergesort is somewhat irritating (to me).
>
> But both are O(N log N), which is good to know. (And, frankly,
> I wouldn't have expected any worse O(N^2) algorithm here.)
In the glibc sources, stdlib/qsort.c has functions heapsort_r() and
qsort_r_mergesort(). I haven't examined it closely enough to know when
and how they're used.
> Janis
>
> [*] C++/STL has at least guarantees for the complexities.
> For me that would basically suffice. I don't necessarily need
> to know whether it's the concrete algorithm A or B.
You effectively have the same guarantee for qsort(), even though it's
not spelled out in the standard.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-21 02:25 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pks1i$22abd$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397122 |
On 2026-03-20 21:22, Keith Thompson wrote: >> [...] > > I don't see a dilemma. qsort() sorts. No serious implementation is > going to use an algorithm with worse than O(n log n) performance. Yes, I also said upthread that my *expectation* is exactly that; that professional libraries use sophisticated algorithms. > >>> Even the GNU libc documentation doesn't say what algorithm that >>> implementation uses. (In the source code, I see references to >>> mergesort and heapsort.) >> >> Though the use of Mergesort is somewhat irritating (to me). >> >> But both are O(N log N), which is good to know. (And, frankly, >> I wouldn't have expected any worse O(N^2) algorithm here.) > > [...] >> >> [*] C++/STL has at least guarantees for the complexities. >> For me that would basically suffice. I don't necessarily need >> to know whether it's the concrete algorithm A or B. > > You effectively have the same guarantee for qsort(), even though it's > not spelled out in the standard. But that was my point here; that there's a difference if that's an assured/documented property or not. And I pointed to C++/STL for the right approach. YMMV, but back in my C++ days I had looked into the complexities of the C++/STL algorithms when (or rather: before) I used them; I needed guarantees in their runtime complexity or otherwise we'd have had to implement own variants tailored for the applications we implemented. Now C++/STL is a well documented sophisticatedly designed library. But, sadly, generally you cannot rely on sophisticated implemented libraries in the IT-world. Take for example Regular Expressions; if you're using Regexps you are (already by the theory of Regular Expressions!) _guaranteed_ that you have a linear O(N) complexity. Alas, some "Regexp"-libraries implemented extensions, and not only syntactic sugar (details that stay within that Chomsky(3)-class), but also extensions that go beyond. The consequence is that these libraries implemented non-regular (backtracking) algorithms that can handle such extensions, but you won't have the O(N) guarantee any more. There were, even for the real Regular Expression subset tremendous run-times (many magnitudes!) to observe. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-19 16:13 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10ph3q9$qap1$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #397080 |
Am 19.03.2026 um 11:23 schrieb Michael S: > The problem with C qsort is not just lack of efficiency. It's also > lacke of flexibilty at API level. In my pratice, in about 30% of the > cases sorting, C qsort will either didn't do what I want at all or at > very least would not do it in thread-safe manner. qsort_r() (POSIX ?) > is a more flexible API that should have been part of C Standard at least > since C11. But it still is not. If you're not allowed to use global variables you can use thread -local variables. These also have fixed addresses. So at the end qsort() is thread-safe.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-19 17:41 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <20260319174137.00007e76@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #397087 |
On Thu, 19 Mar 2026 16:13:17 +0100 Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote: > Am 19.03.2026 um 11:23 schrieb Michael S: > > > The problem with C qsort is not just lack of efficiency. It's also > > lacke of flexibilty at API level. In my pratice, in about 30% of the > > cases sorting, C qsort will either didn't do what I want at all or > > at very least would not do it in thread-safe manner. qsort_r() > > (POSIX ?) is a more flexible API that should have been part of C > > Standard at least since C11. But it still is not. > > If you're not allowed to use global variables you can use thread > -local variables. These also have fixed addresses. So at the end > qsort() is thread-safe. In practice that is likely true. In theory it is not, because C Standard does not guarantee that qsort() is not multi-threaded internally. Of course, with existing API multi-threaded implementation of qsort is impractical, but I'm now wearing my Language Lawyer's hat. It (hat) looks rather new, because I don't wear it often.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 04:01 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pid9u$17mc2$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397078 |
On 2026-03-19 10:43, David Brown wrote: > > Yes, that's fair enough. You have to go out of your way to make a > sorting algorithm that is worse than O(n²), so they will not be found in > real code. But they certainly do exist. [...] Well, that is the not so uncommonly seen effect of bad software. > > [...] But sometimes that is not the fastest tool for the job. > > I've had occasion to need to sort arrays of numbers (ints or floats) > with a compile-time fixed small size - such as 4 or 6 entries. While I > did not use bubblesort, a bubblesort would have beaten standard C > library qsort by an order of magnitude. I can't tell about the 'qsort'; I've never had a need to use it. (And therefore I've never inspected it, as said.) But the characteristic of a good sorting algorithm implementation is that it's often a hybrid. - I mentioned the CDC implementation of Quicksort [in Pascal] that had Straight Insertion Sort for runs smaller than 10. - So even for small datasets you wouldn't have a significant degradation. > > The fun of sorting is that there is no single perfect algorithm that is > always the best choice. There's sets of (sophisticated) algorithms available to choose from. And typical algorithms provided are sensibly hybrids. (Myself I've implemented a Mergesort with a Heapsort to create long initial runs decades ago, for example. And I read from current documentation that this is quite common for libraries written sensibly; e.g. C++/STL.) > > C++'s sorts have the advantage of being template based, and thus can be > more efficient than generic memcpy() and comparison functions for C's > qsort. Usually, at least for larger datasets, sorts are hybrid > algorithms, switching between things like quicksort, insertion sort and > heap sort at different stages in order to maximise cache hits and to get > the balance between the "O" complexity and the constants in the O > function. [...] Ah, I now see you know all that already, so I could have spared some writing. :-) Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 08:35 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pitb9$1coif$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397099 |
On 20/03/2026 04:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > Ah, I now see you know all that already, so I could have spared some > writing. :-) > It's still nice to see we are on the same page. We all have daft ideas or unexpected misunderstandings at times - things we've "always known" that are actually completely wrong. So it's nice to get conformation that others, thinking and writing independently, reach the same conclusions. (I'd expect that all the regulars here will know these things about sorting algorithms, but there's always a chance that someone learns something from the posts.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 12:47 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pjc4r$1h0eh$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397104 |
On 2026-03-20 08:35, David Brown wrote: > On 20/03/2026 04:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > >> Ah, I now see you know all that already, so I could have spared some >> writing. :-) > > It's still nice to see we are on the same page. We all have daft ideas > or unexpected misunderstandings at times - things we've "always known" > that are actually completely wrong. So it's nice to get conformation > that others, thinking and writing independently, reach the same > conclusions. Yes, you're absolutely right. - Actually if there's some statement and it's neither opposed nor confirmed, but just silence, we cannot really value or if necessary correct a view. > > (I'd expect that all the regulars here will know these things about > sorting algorithms, but there's always a chance that someone learns > something from the posts.) I probably would have shared that expectation, but just recently there were a couple individuals that had, umm.., interesting views and opinions about such CS basics (or even the role of CS for IT). Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 14:42 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <20260320144210.00001734@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #397104 |
On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 08:35:05 +0100 David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > On 20/03/2026 04:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > > > Ah, I now see you know all that already, so I could have spared some > > writing. :-) > > > > It's still nice to see we are on the same page. We all have daft > ideas or unexpected misunderstandings at times - things we've "always > known" that are actually completely wrong. So it's nice to get > conformation that others, thinking and writing independently, reach > the same conclusions. > > (I'd expect that all the regulars here will know these things about > sorting algorithms, but there's always a chance that someone learns > something from the posts.) > Pay attention that while it is not codified in C++ Standard, implementations of std::sort are expected to be "in-place", which practically means that extra storage should be O(logN) or at worst O(sqrt(N)). It means that merge sort is out of question. Radix/Count sort is out of question both for this reason and because std::sort API does not provide sufficient guarantees about the structure of key. Heapsort is o.k in that regard. I think that most real-world STL implementations have heapsort as a back up for extremely rare case of primary algorithm (quicksort with median-of-3 pivot) misbehaving.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-22 04:39 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pno8r$301pg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397117 |
On 2026-03-20 13:42, Michael S wrote: > On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 08:35:05 +0100 > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > >> On 20/03/2026 04:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> >>> Ah, I now see you know all that already, so I could have spared some >>> writing. :-) >>> >> >> It's still nice to see we are on the same page. We all have daft >> ideas or unexpected misunderstandings at times - things we've "always >> known" that are actually completely wrong. So it's nice to get >> conformation that others, thinking and writing independently, reach >> the same conclusions. >> >> (I'd expect that all the regulars here will know these things about >> sorting algorithms, but there's always a chance that someone learns >> something from the posts.) >> > > Pay attention that while it is not codified in C++ Standard, > implementations of std::sort are expected to be "in-place", which > practically means that extra storage should be O(logN) or at worst > O(sqrt(N)). It means that merge sort is out of question. Radix/Count > sort is out of question both for this reason and because std::sort API > does not provide sufficient guarantees about the structure of key. > Heapsort is o.k in that regard. > I think that most real-world STL implementations have heapsort as a > back up for extremely rare case of primary algorithm (quicksort with > median-of-3 pivot) misbehaving. I had found these statements: * By default, std::sort() uses Introsort, a hybrid algorithm combining Quick Sort, Heap Sort, and Insertion Sort. * Its time complexity is O(Nlog(N)) in the average and worst cases. The Insertion Sort function had ever been inherent part of Quicksort implementations for data sub-ranges once they become of small sizes. I'm positive, though, that your statement of "misbehaving" Quicksort makes absolutely no sense (at least as you formulated it). How could a call to sort() decide to use a "backup" algorithm; the very "rare" O(N^2) corner case that you spoke about is depending on the _actual_ _data_ and cannot be characterized a priori! What the Introsort algorithm actually does is dynamically depending on the _recursion depth_, and to control that. To quote: "Introsort begins with quicksort and if the recursion depth goes more than a particular limit it switches to Heapsort". But then you should also know that you can also natively in Quicksort control the recursive calls to not exceed recursive calls or the stack size by log(N). Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-22 08:33 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <20260322083337.0000147e@yahoo.com> |
| In reply to | #397133 |
On Sun, 22 Mar 2026 04:39:07 +0100 Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 2026-03-20 13:42, Michael S wrote: > > On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 08:35:05 +0100 > > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > > > >> On 20/03/2026 04:01, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > >> > >>> Ah, I now see you know all that already, so I could have spared > >>> some writing. :-) > >>> > >> > >> It's still nice to see we are on the same page. We all have daft > >> ideas or unexpected misunderstandings at times - things we've > >> "always known" that are actually completely wrong. So it's nice > >> to get conformation that others, thinking and writing > >> independently, reach the same conclusions. > >> > >> (I'd expect that all the regulars here will know these things about > >> sorting algorithms, but there's always a chance that someone learns > >> something from the posts.) > >> > > > > Pay attention that while it is not codified in C++ Standard, > > implementations of std::sort are expected to be "in-place", which > > practically means that extra storage should be O(logN) or at worst > > O(sqrt(N)). It means that merge sort is out of question. Radix/Count > > sort is out of question both for this reason and because std::sort > > API does not provide sufficient guarantees about the structure of > > key. Heapsort is o.k in that regard. > > I think that most real-world STL implementations have heapsort as a > > back up for extremely rare case of primary algorithm (quicksort with > > median-of-3 pivot) misbehaving. > > I had found these statements: > > * By default, std::sort() uses Introsort, a hybrid algorithm > combining Quick Sort, Heap Sort, and Insertion Sort. > * Its time complexity is O(Nlog(N)) in the average and worst > cases. > > The Insertion Sort function had ever been inherent part of Quicksort > implementations for data sub-ranges once they become of small sizes. > May be, it is true for STL. But not generally. There are plenty of implementations of quicksort that switch to other algorithm at short sections or don't switch at all. For example, when one sorts array of big records by small by simple key (expensive move, cheap comparison) then staright select sort would be faster than straight insertion sort. STL, being generic, does not know relative cost of move vs comparison, so it has to peek one or another algo without such knowledge. It peeks insertion sort, which is reasonable, because in practice people rarely sort arrays of big records, more commonly they sort arrays of pointers to big records. > I'm positive, though, that your statement of "misbehaving" Quicksort > makes absolutely no sense (at least as you formulated it). How could > a call to sort() decide to use a "backup" algorithm; the very "rare" > O(N^2) corner case that you spoke about is depending on the _actual_ > _data_ and cannot be characterized a priori! > If you decided to misunderstand my statement, which of course always was about dynamic swithing then I can not do anything about it. IMHO, my statement was hard to misunderstand. > What the Introsort algorithm actually does is dynamically depending > on the _recursion depth_, and to control that. To quote: > "Introsort begins with quicksort and if the recursion depth > goes more than a particular limit it switches to Heapsort". > > But then you should also know that you can also natively in Quicksort > control the recursive calls to not exceed recursive calls or the stack > size by log(N). Yes. Just always sort shorter of two sub-sections after split ahead of longer sub-section and you are guaranteed to never exceed recursion depth of log2(N). The same can happen even without one's intention during O(N**2) behavior. And it means that recursion depth alone can't be used for robust switching from quicksort to heapsort. It is easy to invent few more robust criteria for switching. I don't know what criterion is chosen by "default" (what it means, BTW?) by this or that STL author. > > Janis >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 17:10 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pkd4h$1uart$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397104 |
On 3/20/2026 3:35 AM, David Brown wrote: > (I'd expect that all the regulars here will know these things about > sorting algorithms, but there's always a chance that someone learns > something from the posts.) This. Sometimes listening to you clc guys is like listening to a room full of CS professors (which I suspect some of you are or were).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-21 02:53 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pktmu$22abd$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397123 |
On 2026-03-20 22:10, DFS wrote: > > Sometimes listening to you clc guys is like listening to a room full of > CS professors (which I suspect some of you are or were). CS professors sitting in their ivory tower and without practical experiences, and programmers without a substantial CS background; both of these extreme characters can be problematic (if fanatic). Many folks here seem to have a good mix of necessary practical IT, Project, and CS knowledge and proficiencies, as I'd value it. And a clear mind to discuss topics. Sometimes it gets heated and personal, though; certainly nothing to foster. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-20 22:35 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pl04l$245al$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397125 |
On 3/20/2026 9:53 PM, Janis Papanagnou wrote: > On 2026-03-20 22:10, DFS wrote: >> >> Sometimes listening to you clc guys is like listening to a room full >> of CS professors (which I suspect some of you are or were). > > CS professors sitting in their ivory tower and without practical > experiences, and programmers without a substantial CS background; > both of these extreme characters can be problematic (if fanatic). It was meant as a compliment. Plenty of CS professors have good practical and industry experience, too, which you'll see on their bios and cv's. It's got to be tough to find good CS teachers that stick around, given they can probably make much more money in private industry. > Many folks here seem to have a good mix of necessary practical > IT, Project, and CS knowledge and proficiencies, as I'd value it. > And a clear mind to discuss topics. Sometimes it gets heated and > personal, though; certainly nothing to foster. I've definitely seen Bart take some heat for continuing to post code in his scripting language, rather than C.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-21 14:42 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pmaov$2h3s0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397126 |
On 21/03/2026 02:35, DFS wrote: > On 3/20/2026 9:53 PM, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> On 2026-03-20 22:10, DFS wrote: >>> >>> Sometimes listening to you clc guys is like listening to a room full >>> of CS professors (which I suspect some of you are or were). >> >> CS professors sitting in their ivory tower and without practical >> experiences, and programmers without a substantial CS background; >> both of these extreme characters can be problematic (if fanatic). > > > It was meant as a compliment. Plenty of CS professors have good > practical and industry experience, too, which you'll see on their bios > and cv's. > > It's got to be tough to find good CS teachers that stick around, given > they can probably make much more money in private industry. > > >> Many folks here seem to have a good mix of necessary practical >> IT, Project, and CS knowledge and proficiencies, as I'd value it. >> And a clear mind to discuss topics. Sometimes it gets heated and >> personal, though; certainly nothing to foster. > I've definitely seen Bart take some heat for continuing to post code in > his scripting language, rather than C People post bits of code in all sorts of languages when it suits them. It's happened in this thread (Bash, AWK, Python as well as C++), and in many others. But I get a lot of heat because I use my personal languages, especially my systems language which is probably the closest to C in type system and capabilities (if not in syntax) that I know of. Not so much posting code in it, but using my experience and perspective to talk about aspects of language design, or about how compilers should work. Apparently such first-hand experience makes your opinion worth less, not more! Actually, to be strictly topical, nobody should even be talking about any C extensions, or C compilers, or build systems, or programs that happen to be written in C - only Standard C, The Language. Yet there have been plenty of discussions about all those and a lot more. I once made a post about my own C-subset compiler: https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.c/c/0lLNz9lathE/m/Lt4Jh0qqAwAJ and it was deemed off-topic by Tim Rentsch: "Please confine your postings in comp.lang.c to topics and subjects relevant to the C language. None of what you say in your posting is topical in comp.lang.c. An obvious suggestion is the newsgroup comp.compilers instead."
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-22 04:57 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pnpb2$301pg$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397130 |
On 2026-03-21 15:42, Bart wrote: > [...] > > Actually, to be strictly topical, nobody should even be talking about > any C extensions, or C compilers, or build systems, or programs that > happen to be written in C - only Standard C, The Language. Yet there > have been plenty of discussions about all those and a lot more. > > I once made a post about my own C-subset compiler: > > https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.c/c/0lLNz9lathE/m/Lt4Jh0qqAwAJ > > and it was deemed off-topic by Tim Rentsch: > > "Please confine your postings in comp.lang.c to topics and subjects > relevant to the C language. None of what you say in your posting > is topical in comp.lang.c. An obvious suggestion is the newsgroup > comp.compilers instead." He's (as you or others here) an individual. If you think he's valuing situations or your contents (and on a regular basis) inappropriately I suggest to just ignore him. It make little sense to whine about it. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-04-06 12:32 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <86h5pnzxy7.fsf@linuxsc.com> |
| In reply to | #397130 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 21/03/2026 02:35, DFS wrote: > >> On 3/20/2026 9:53 PM, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> >>> On 2026-03-20 22:10, DFS wrote: >>> >>>> Sometimes listening to you clc guys is like listening to a room >>>> full of CS professors (which I suspect some of you are or were). >>> >>> CS professors sitting in their ivory tower and without practical >>> experiences, and programmers without a substantial CS background; >>> both of these extreme characters can be problematic (if fanatic). >> >> It was meant as a compliment. Plenty of CS professors have good >> practical and industry experience, too, which you'll see on their >> bios and cv's. >> >> It's got to be tough to find good CS teachers that stick around, >> given they can probably make much more money in private industry. >> >> >>> Many folks here seem to have a good mix of necessary practical >>> IT, Project, and CS knowledge and proficiencies, as I'd value it. >>> And a clear mind to discuss topics. Sometimes it gets heated and >>> personal, though; certainly nothing to foster. >> >> I've definitely seen Bart take some heat for continuing to post code >> in his scripting language, rather than C > > People post bits of code in all sorts of languages when it suits > them. It's happened in this thread (Bash, AWK, Python as well as C++), > and in many others. > > But I get a lot of heat because I use my personal languages, You get heat because you ignore the rules of usual newgroup etiquette, which most other posters observe, and because you insist on focusing on your self-centered interests, without regard or consideration for other readers or the chartered purpose of the group. Besides being better for the group, it would be better for you if you could learn to be less self-focused, and more considerate of others.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-22 04:50 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pnous$301pg$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397126 |
On 2026-03-21 03:35, DFS wrote: > On 3/20/2026 9:53 PM, Janis Papanagnou wrote: >> On 2026-03-20 22:10, DFS wrote: >>> >>> Sometimes listening to you clc guys is like listening to a room full >>> of CS professors (which I suspect some of you are or were). >> >> CS professors sitting in their ivory tower and without practical >> experiences, and programmers without a substantial CS background; >> both of these extreme characters can be problematic (if fanatic). > > It was meant as a compliment. Plenty of CS professors have good > practical and industry experience, too, which you'll see on their bios > and cv's. This is certainly correct. - But I've met all sorts of "CV"s. Titles alone doesn't mean anything! Some proficiencies are how good they are teaching, doing relevant research, having actually spent significant time in relevant industrial areas (as you say), and whatnot. > > It's got to be tough to find good CS teachers that stick around, given > they can probably make much more money in private industry. Depends on the mindset, I suppose; whether their primary goal is to make money or to disseminate their valuable academic knowledge. I've met the whole range from excellent to lousy CS teachers. Janis
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-03-21 15:39 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Isn't that beauty ? (no it's not) |
| Message-ID | <10pmajq$2gvdt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #397123 |
On 20/03/2026 22:10, DFS wrote: > On 3/20/2026 3:35 AM, David Brown wrote: > > >> (I'd expect that all the regulars here will know these things about >> sorting algorithms, but there's always a chance that someone learns >> something from the posts.) > > > This. > > Sometimes listening to you clc guys is like listening to a room full of > CS professors (which I suspect some of you are or were). > I can't speak for others, but I am not an academic (though my university degree was quite theoretical - maths and computation). And sometimes the people that learn from these kinds of posts are the people making the posts. I know I have learned things as a result of making posts (though I don't think I have learned anything new in this particular discussion). After all, the fastest way to get an answer to a question on the internet is to post an incorrect claim!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 12 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 12 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web