Path: csiph.com!2.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!border2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 15:42:43 -0600
From: Gareth Owen <gwowen@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Qucksort for Linked List
References: <dfa00771-7568-443b-ab45-174f0749a176@googlegroups.com> <K8mdnXD8M6gvVdzFnZ2dnUU7-aednZ2d@giganews.com> <o2m7v7$2s1e$1@adenine.netfront.net> <a8ydnTLbnp2tcNPFnZ2dnUU7-bGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <o2o7q6$2prn$1@adenine.netfront.net> <yuudnRfdreaAqM3FnZ2dnUU7-LudnZ2d@giganews.com> <o2rcld$nhd$1@dont-email.me> <87d1gue00s.fsf@gmail.com> <mrSdnUOdRsH4JczFnZ2dnUU7-TGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 21:42:42 +0000
Message-ID: <87vaumqjal.fsf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:GgP4OYlRM4aSECOEJaowr6ZFc5Q=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 24
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-DUABCAQsI4gQ5LBlsiIRkQkcpESE2ruAJDlLtOOjJuSBJ8xQKhqFY+eFD0ZjBsyyIfhOW8mBC5mlvVd!Bw5uzRc9s89vWHYESxPMZyEgqQi8UKOelDv/zHl6HEdHt82FXDU8nDA9oinTEgUb2tXZ
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2317
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:47367

Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> writes:

> On 14/12/2016 20:19, Gareth Owen wrote:
>> "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 13.12.2016 18:51, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Quicksort will be worse than O(n . lg n) for linked lists.
>>>
>>> /That/ depends very much on the implementation, or possibly what one's
>>> idea of the defining characteristic of Quicksort, is.
>>
>> Just be aware that Flibble has shown on multiple occasions that
>> mathematics is not one of his strengths.
>
> By asserting that there is no such thing as negative zero and that
> division by zero is undefined?  My assertions are correct mate.

They're true of the real numbers, but to suggest they're always true is
to deny the the existence of projective geometry.

Mathematics is not one of your strengths.  I'll bet £1 to your favourite
charity that your best qualification in Mathematics is not better than a
'B' at 'A-level'.