Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Optimization by programmers
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2026 04:38:18 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <8633unnhed.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <1177fdi$26ea4$1@dont-email.me> <1736alhffrj7iuhfsesdo31bofc0m8pr12@4ax.com> <2026Sep11.083321@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <6aa5876f.783937@news.eternal-september.org> <2026Sep12.201446@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <6aa6172e.15711625@news.eternal-september.org> <2026Sep13.162747@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <118h4cj$fi2a$1@dont-email.me> <118ltsc$26ss6$1@dont-email.me> <2026Sep19.175649@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> <118odha$31okp$1@dont-email.me> <86a4pct2oj.fsf@linuxsc.com> <119q3q8$36790$2@paganini.bofh.team>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2026 11:38:21 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; logging-data="3118693"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/oIMy/RbYEDJI1cXYF3JjbibpUq2xeWU0="; posting-host="b0e28b4afc9fd8b2450f610d134fbfb4"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:L/DK/MDhTVQTEf84nXlHAMPVCx8= sha1:MMv8874NBUqTKFwBgzNhEFhyO9k= sha256:Zq65Uudix8o0f1Sn94tDJuAd1fVYrz32xlkiPCSUUUE= sha1:TNWJOFA5iXuBhC2281IrSSx0s8A= sha256:kzx9WIULHSLuhKq5R3v4g66DgznRq17utmIVQ2vmD+Q=
Xref: csiph.com comp.arch:118422

antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) writes:

> Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> wrote:
>
>> Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> writes:
>>
>>> Bubblesort is the worst of non-joke sorting algorithms, see
>>> the quote from Numerical Recipes...
>>
>> For people who don't like bubble sort, or for inclusion in a set
>> of benchmarks, I suggest the following recently discovered
>> sorting algorithm (written in C-ish pseudocode):
>>
>>    void
>>    baffle_sort( unsigned n, int *elements ){
>>       for( unsigned i = 0; i < n; i++ ){
>>          for( unsigned j = 0; j < n; j++ ){
>>             if(  elements[i] < elements[j]  ){
>>                /* exchange elements[i] and elements[j] */
>>             }
>>          }
>>       }
>>    }
>>
>> (Disclaimer:  not original.)
>
> AFAICS this is very old "sorting by choice" algortim,

I suggest you look again.  It is not a selection sort.

> just written
> in inefficient way (using swaps and keeping running max in the
> array instead of using extra variable).

I am making no claim that this sort would be a good choice if
one wanted an efficient algorithm.  Surely no one would choose
it on that basis.  That's not what makes it interesting.