As title. Is it faster for inplace sorting, or simply the implementation of list.sort() was done before the implementation of timsort? _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/HTSJ7K4GYFZ2P6XUIQYDOTDAGCJDXJH6/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
- [Python-Dev] Why list.sort() uses mergesort and not timso... Marco Sulla
- [Python-Dev] Re: Why list.sort() uses mergesort and ... Christian Heimes
- [Python-Dev] Re: Why list.sort() uses mergesort and ... Dan Stromberg
- [Python-Dev] Re: Why list.sort() uses mergesort ... Senthil Kumaran
- [Python-Dev] Re: Why list.sort() uses merges... Antoine Pitrou
- [Python-Dev] Re: Why list.sort() uses mergesort ... Kyle Stanley
- [Python-Dev] Re: Why list.sort() uses mergesort ... Tim Peters
- [Python-Dev] Re: Why list.sort() uses merges... Dan Stromberg
