On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 23:52:52 -0400, logicchains
<jonathan.t.barn...@gmail.com> wrote:
Blog author here, I've added a note that D's sort matches the speed of
C++'s when the stable sort is used instead of the default unstable. I
don't think there's anything wrong with D's unstable sort however, as
the C++ version also performs worse when using std::sort (unstable)
instead of std::stable_sort.
Is it just me, or does this seem unintuitive? I would think a stable sort
requires extra care, i.e. extra time, to ensure stability.
Do we need an unstable sort then? Or is this a corner case? I am fully
ignorant on these advanced sorting routines and how they work. The
Quicksort-based sort routines are like black magic to me, my knowledge
stops at merge sort :)
-Steve
