See also http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/Essays/Sorting_versus_Grading As well, more benchmarks should be done before drawing firm conclusions about relative efficiencies. The data used so far is rather special and makes possible algorithms not available in more general cases. e.g.
ts=: 6!:2 , 7!:[EMAIL PROTECTED] v0=: (*:1024) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024 v1=: (*:1024) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2e9 v2=: (*:1024) [EMAIL PROTECTED] *:1024 ts '/:~ v0' 0.0243629 8.39757e6 ts '/:~ v1' 0.49494 1.73023e7 ts '/:~ v2' 0.229462 1.6778e7 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Sherlock, Ric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Friday, March 14, 2008 2:55 Subject: [Jchat] RE: Alternate Quick Sort To: Chat forum <[email protected]> > ---Alex Rufon wrote: > > So I thought about how I actually do sorting > > which is this way: > > $v=: (1024 * 1024) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ... > > timespacex 'v{~/:v' > > 0.0476471870028174 25166528 > > Simpler, faster and leaner. > > ts 'v{~/:v' > 0.0769561494547 16777920 > ts '/:~v' > 0.0175374942905 8397504 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
