From:	dontmailme AT iname DOT com (Steamer)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: qsort's algorithm
Date:	Wed, 18 Oct 2000 10:57:14 GMT
Organization:	always disorganized
Lines:	18
Message-ID:	<39ed81db.9884699@news.freeserve.net>
References:	<tf4qusk3quottc52jj9cmuhmqlvk48cgm7 AT 4ax DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	modem-63.wisconsin.dialup.pol.co.uk
X-Trace:	newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk 971866635 12376 62.137.99.63 (18 Oct 2000 10:57:15 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date:	18 Oct 2000 10:57:15 GMT
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT theplanet DOT net
X-Newsreader:	Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Damian Yerrick wrote:

> From what I understand of the C standard, qsort() can use any decent
> sorting algorithm.

Yes, the standard permits any decent sorting algorithm.
Or even an indecent one...

> Does DJGPP libc's qsort() have bad performance on
> already sorted data?

It sorts a sorted array faster than it sorts a typical unsorted
array.  Of course, straight insertion would be considerably faster
if you know in advance that the array is [nearly] sorted - but
you need to be really certain, because using straight insertion
on a large random array would take ages.

S.

- Raw text -