4 ms·
> if radix sort is faster, and not due to better cache performance, what is it due to? Uhm, perhaps its time complexity?
by wfunction 11y ago
> if radix sort is faster, and not due to better cache performance, what is it due to?
Uhm, perhaps its time complexity?
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoUnless you're sorting >2<number of bits / element> elements, that logarithmic factor will be better than the constant of radix sort. Asymptotic complexity with (sub)logarithmic factors is iffy at best, and this is a shining example thereof.