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

Groups > comp.programming > #9791

Re: C is not a low level language

Subject Re: C is not a low level language
Newsgroups alt.windows7.general, comp.lang.c, comp.programming, alt.comp.os.windows-10
References (8 earlier) <250220191305329065%nospam@nospam.invalid> <0do97etnq9hsqr954ci8aak1q1gc74hkbd@4ax.com> <m28sy27txq.fsf@despina.home> <50ra7ed9666gaccgk5plkc2bsg3aq1dst3@4ax.com> <vjfdE.42303$dv2.31594@fx01.iad>
From Bart <bc@freeuk.com>
Message-ID <PvfdE.16946$R96.8259@fx33.am4> (permalink)
Organization virginmedia.com
Date 2019-02-26 18:24 +0000

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 26/02/2019 18:11, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> writes:
>> On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 10:58:09 +0100, "Pascal J. Bourguignon"
>> <pjb@informatimago.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>
>>>>> bubble sort is very easy to write, it's just not fast.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Insertion sort is even easier to write.  And it's usually twice as
>>>> fast as bubble sort.
>>>
>>> Bubble sort is the fastest, on a vector already sorted. It's O(n) with
>>> the best constants in this best case.
>>
>>
>> I've heard that assertion multiple time, but have not seen much
>> evidence to back it up.  In some tests I've run over the years, bubble
>> sort and insertion sort on already sorted datasets tend to have
>> performance very nearly the same, if not identical, subject to
>> implementation vagaries.  If there is an advantage, it's very small.
>>
>> Consider (MSVC, /Ox):
>>
>> #include <windows.h>
>>
>> #define ITER 1000000
>> #define SZ 10000
>> int a[SZ];
>>
> 
> Ok, now try it with a dataset that doesn't fit into the typical
> L1D cache.   (e.g. #define SZ 10000000  // ~400MB).
> 

You have a typo so it's not clear if you mean 10M items or 100M.

But with either, timings are pretty much identical, unoptimised. 
Optimised, bubble sort is still ahead.

However, nobody would ever use bubble sort with N=1000, let along 10M or 
100M.

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 12:40 +0800
  Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 05:16 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 13:20 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 13:24 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 19:45 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 13:09 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 14:38 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 15:18 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 17:21 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 17:43 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 20:17 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:19 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 20:02 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 19:26 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-24 21:36 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 20:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:10 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:25 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 12:24 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 17:04 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 17:59 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 08:46 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 09:36 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 10:13 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-26 09:56 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-25 14:12 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 12:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 13:36 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:29 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 09:41 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:55 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 10:24 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:58 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-25 09:40 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 10:01 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 12:55 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 08:31 +0100
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 17:42 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:19 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-24 17:56 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-24 18:23 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 20:58 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 20:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:31 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 14:01 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-25 23:04 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 15:53 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:07 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 20:50 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:04 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:25 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-28 11:56 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-28 19:45 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 17:55 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-28 16:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-28 11:25 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-28 19:30 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 20:47 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 21:29 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-25 20:16 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 12:53 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 09:49 +0200
    Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 21:07 +0100
      Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 22:59 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 09:57 +0100
          Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 09:59 +0000
  Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 19:54 +1300
    Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 07:56 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 21:58 +1300
        Re: C is not a low level language "A. Dumas" <alexandre@dumas.fr.invalid> - 2019-02-24 10:57 +0100
        Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 10:13 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 10:47 +0000
          Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 08:48 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 14:42 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 07:15 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 09:25 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 15:03 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 12:10 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 17:58 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Axel Berger <Spam@Berger-Odenthal.De> - 2019-02-25 17:44 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 19:18 +0200
            Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 10:35 +0200
              Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 10:44 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-02-25 12:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 14:26 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 17:08 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:08 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 18:00 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-27 22:37 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-28 02:25 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 12:27 +0000
              Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-25 09:36 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 15:05 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 19:20 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-25 23:02 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 06:52 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:41 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 12:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 14:01 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-26 08:48 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-26 19:20 +0100
              Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 10:04 -0500
        Re: C is not a low level language lonelydad <lonelydad58@gmail.com> - 2019-02-24 14:44 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language "U-laptop\\Norah" <Norah@laptop.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> - 2019-02-27 16:16 -0600
          Re: C is not a low level language Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> - 2019-03-01 12:12 +1300
            Re: C is not a low level language Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2019-03-01 00:19 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2019-02-24 19:59 -0800
        Re: C is not a low level language Bill Findlay <findlaybill@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2019-02-25 16:10 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language Björn Lundin <b.f.lundin@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 21:02 +0100
          Re: C is not a low level language Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2019-02-26 00:37 +0100
            Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 19:09 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-26 06:52 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language T <T@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 00:30 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language T <T@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-24 00:31 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2019-02-24 10:16 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-24 11:22 +0000
      Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 08:51 -0500
        Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 07:20 -0800
          Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-24 15:35 +0000
            Re: C is not a low level language "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> - 2019-02-24 11:05 -0500
            Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 14:39 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-24 19:11 -0800
              Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 09:41 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 14:53 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 10:19 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-25 16:38 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-25 11:20 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 17:49 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:18 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:25 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:40 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:45 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-26 08:02 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wolf K <wolfmac@sympatico.ca> - 2019-02-26 09:11 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:23 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-26 08:02 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 17:57 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 17:42 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 22:33 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-02-26 09:30 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-02-25 13:52 -0800
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 15:20 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 18:47 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:50 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-25 18:59 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-25 20:15 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-25 18:38 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:49 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:40 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Wouter Verhelst <w@uter.be> - 2019-02-26 12:55 +0200
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-26 16:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Diesel <nobody@haph.org> - 2019-03-05 04:29 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-03-04 23:43 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 18:16 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-25 17:44 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 13:05 -0500
                Re: C is not a low level language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-26 00:51 -0600
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 10:58 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-26 10:53 -0600
                Re: C is not a low level language Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-02-26 17:49 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-02-26 18:11 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-02-26 18:24 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 19:24 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language "Pascal J. Bourguignon" <pjb@informatimago.com> - 2019-02-26 19:44 +0100
                Re: C is not a low level language nobody@example.org (Scott) - 2019-02-26 06:33 +0000
                Re: C is not a low level language nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-25 12:17 -0500
        Re: C is not a low level language Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2019-02-24 20:03 -0800
      Re: C is not a low level language pyotr filipivich <phamp@mindspring.com> - 2019-02-24 14:56 -0800
  Re: C is not a low level language Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> - 2019-02-24 20:43 +0000
    Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 14:14 +0800
      Re: C is not a low level language "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255@255soft.uk> - 2019-02-25 10:45 +0000
        Re: C is not a low level language "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2019-02-25 19:04 +0800

csiph-web