I don't think you fully read the post I was replying to. I was just saying that that poster's argument against changing the sorting algorithm was misguided. Qu

I don't think you fully read the post I was replying to. I was just saying that that poster's argument against changing the sorting algorithm was misguided. Quote: > will be reviewed and tested by 200 people before it reaches production I was only saying that this is a bad argument for changing to any simple-ish sorting algorithm. (Because: add tests if you need assurance) Granted, if you're doing super-complicated sorting algos with fallbacks for different sizes, heuristics for detecting semi-sorted input, etc. you might want something more sophisticated than trivial property-based checking.