Re: Quicker then QuickSort???
From: Kristofer Gafvert (kgafvert_at_NEWSilopia.com)
Date: 05/10/04
- Next message: Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]: "Re: structure"
- Previous message: anon: "Re: How many man-hours were used in creating .NET 1.0?"
- In reply to: Tim Clark: "Re: Quicker then QuickSort???"
- Next in thread: madler: "Re: Quicker then QuickSort???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 22:48:16 +0200
Thank you for the information about the time complexity!
-- Regards, Kristofer Gafvert - IIS MVP http://www.ilopia.com - When you need help! "Tim Clark" <cpdog_@adelphi.netWithoutUnderscore> wrote in message news:NeqdnZaCGtA0fgLdRVn-jg@adelphia.com... > Kristofer Gafvert wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Have you tried your algorithm with all kind of different data input? Without > > pseudo code, i cannot tell you the O(n) for this algorithm (because i am > > lazy today), but that is not the main point of my message. The point with my > > It's going to run in BigTheta(n^2) time. > > To the OP: Nested loops in sorting algorithms == bad things :). If you > are sorting 30 things, an n^2 algorithm may go faster, but when sorting > 10000, an n^2 algorithm will be EXTREMELY slow.
- Next message: Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]: "Re: structure"
- Previous message: anon: "Re: How many man-hours were used in creating .NET 1.0?"
- In reply to: Tim Clark: "Re: Quicker then QuickSort???"
- Next in thread: madler: "Re: Quicker then QuickSort???"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|