https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10318
--- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-11-22 02:46:24 PST --- A comment by yebblies: > Is the phobos sort good enough to replace it? IIRC there were some > problems... Phobos sort is not perfect, in some pathological cases its unstable algorithm goes in quadratic behavour, and it will need to become something more like the C++ STL introsort (that switches to another O(n ln n) algorithm in those cases). But still I think the Phobos sort is better than (safer, faster, less buggy, look in Bugzilla for some of the built-in sort bugs) than the built-in sort. And as programmers are lazy and don't add a () (or sometimes they forget) more and more code is written relying on the built-in sort, and it is not compatible with the Phobos sort (Phobos sort doesn't sort a char[] and it doesn't return the sorted array, you need a ".release"), this will cause growing problems in porting that code. So I think deprecating the built-in sort is becoming urgent. In some months I will probably increase the importance of this from normal to major. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
