http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464929
http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464929#c3 Jonathan Chambers <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #3 from Jonathan Chambers <[email protected]> 2009-12-11 14:22:12 UTC --- I ran our algorithm on .Net (for int[]) and we are about 2X slower than .Net's sort. I noticed we short circuit int[], double[], and char[] to use a handcoded combsort. That is in fact faster than a qsort with a Comparer, but if I use a hand coded qsort instead of combsort we run as fast as .Net on .Net. The Comparer case was as the bug states, about 5X slower than .Net. And that was on .Net. So, our inefficiencies seem to have little to do with runtime, and mostly with our Sort itself. So, is a solution to use a hand coded qsort, or is there a way to make the general qsort faster (with the Comparer)? -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug. _______________________________________________ mono-bugs maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-bugs
