3 ms·

while i agree with you to some extent, i don't think including a very large set of sorting functions in the standard library is a good idea. especially for dyna

while i agree with you to some extent, i don't think including a very large set of sorting functions in the standard library is a good idea. especially for dynamic languages, a larger standard library means more disk usage and worse cache utilization. it's also typically relatively easy to use your own sort function: in performance-critical cases, the sort function is usually called directly, not via intermediate libraries (which might need to be patched to call the new sort function); also, sort functions are self-contained, i.e. typically don't require system dependencies.

samhw 4y ago
> A larger standard library means more disk usage and worse cache utilization Does it? How? I suppose one has to store the standard library on the machine, which does notionally use up disk space, but I can’t see how it contributes by any reasonable performance-relevant meaning of ‘disk usage’ (presumably i.e. disk I/O during the runtime of the program). And for cache utilization I simply have no clue at all what you might be driving at.