Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #41175

Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list

From Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de>
Subject Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list
Date 2013-03-13 13:00 +0100
Organization None
References <mailman.3239.1363109618.2939.python-list@python.org> <513fdcfc$0$29965$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <loom.20130313T111109-885@post.gmane.org> <CAHVvXxSLADKHqDZYpjL0o17QJ+XMjD+_0Qeg26439PSWBKamgw@mail.gmail.com> <loom.20130313T122745-552@post.gmane.org>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.3264.1363176047.2939.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw


Wolfgang Maier wrote:

> Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin <at> gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> 
>> Sort cannot be O(log(n)) and it cannot be faster than a standard O(n)
>> minimum finding algorithm. No valid sorting algorithm can have even a
>> best case performance that is better than O(n). This is because it
>> takes O(n) just to verify that a list is sorted.
>> 
>> Oscar
>> 
> 
> Oops, you're right of course.
> Wrote this in a hurry before and got confused a bit.
> So, the two min()s take O(n) each, the sort takes O(n),

O(n*log(n)) according to

<http://wiki.python.org/moin/TimeComplexity>

> but the bisect takes O(log n),
> which means that sorting and bisecting together should still be faster
> than 2xmin(), although it's a bit less striking than what I wrote first.

That's not how big-O math works. 2*O(n) is still O(n).

2*O(n) == O(n)

As n grows an O(log(n)) approach will eventually be faster than O(n), but 
that's asymptotical behaviour and allows for an arbitrary constant factor. 
For a given n you cannot decide if the O(n) or the O(log(n)) algorithm is 
faster unless you know these constant factors. 

Put another way: Iterating twice over the list doubles an unknown constant 
factor.


Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Norah Jones <nh.jones01@gmail.com> - 2013-03-12 17:03 +0000
  Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-13 01:57 +0000
    Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Wolfgang Maier <wolfgang.maier@biologie.uni-freiburg.de> - 2013-03-13 10:43 +0000
      Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-03-14 04:45 -0700
      Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2013-03-14 04:45 -0700
    Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2013-03-13 11:23 +0000
      Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-13 14:12 +0000
        Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-03-13 14:37 +0000
    Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Wolfgang Maier <wolfgang.maier@biologie.uni-freiburg.de> - 2013-03-13 11:34 +0000
      Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-03-13 14:43 +0000
    Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-13 22:36 +1100
    Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-03-13 22:38 +1100
    Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2013-03-13 13:00 +0100
    Re: Finding the Min for positive and negative in python 3.3 list Wolfgang Maier <wolfgang.maier@biologie.uni-freiburg.de> - 2013-03-13 14:17 +0000

csiph-web