4 ms·
Yeah, that's about it. Personally, I'm not sure I'd get this much out of the picture, but you can see the information is there. > surely it can't be just three
by klibertp 1y ago
Yeah, that's about it. Personally, I'm not sure I'd get this much out of the picture, but you can see the information is there.
> surely it can't be just three iterations?
To save others a search: you stop when the remaining sub-arrays are sorted by definition (ie. [] or [x]/size of 0 or 1).
- tialaramex 1y agoAlso, to save any further puzzling: In practice the very fast sort you use, even if it is labelled "Quicksort" probably doesn't actually do this "all the way down" even though that's the strict algorithm. They'll have a highly optimised small sort and use that whenever sorting very small things. So e.g. IPN Sort the Rust stdlib unstable sort will do this for 16 items, even though for a big slice it'd quick sort them by default, once it's down to say 10 items they're going to the specialised small sort. Any serious "fast" sort in 2025 will be a hybrid, using several of these classic sorting algortihms, plus other insights to produce the overall best solution to their problem on modern hardware.