Difference between revisions of "Talk:LlListSort"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Pedro Oval (talk | contribs) (→Bubble Sort?: Reverse not stable either) |
Void Singer (talk | contribs) m (→Bubble Sort?) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
maybe... needs an extended example to see if LSL backwards ordering isn't the culprit<br/>-- '''[[User:Void_Singer|Void]]''' <sup><small>([[User_talk:Void_Singer|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Void_Singer|contribs]])</small></sup> 22:19, 5 April 2014 (PDT) | maybe... needs an extended example to see if LSL backwards ordering isn't the culprit<br/>-- '''[[User:Void_Singer|Void]]''' <sup><small>([[User_talk:Void_Singer|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Void_Singer|contribs]])</small></sup> 22:19, 5 April 2014 (PDT) | ||
:If it's in reverse order, it's not stable either. The reverse would be 3,1,3,5,3,2 but the actual result is 3,5,3,1,3,2 --[[User:Pedro Oval|Pedro Oval]] 12:39, 6 April 2014 (PDT) | :If it's in reverse order, it's not stable either. The reverse would be 3,1,3,5,3,2 but the actual result is 3,5,3,1,3,2 --[[User:Pedro Oval|Pedro Oval]] 12:39, 6 April 2014 (PDT) | ||
doh, you're right... comb sort perhaps? looking at the ordering exchange seems more likely than insertion<br/>-- '''[[User:Void_Singer|Void]]''' <sup><small>([[User_talk:Void_Singer|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Void_Singer|contribs]])</small></sup> 17:20, 6 April 2014 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 16:20, 6 April 2014
Bubble Sort?
This script: <lsl> default {
state_entry()
{
llOwnerSay(llList2CSV(llListSort([3,2,3,5,3,1,1,4], 2, TRUE)));
}
} </lsl>
outputs
1, 4, 3, 5, 3, 1, 3, 2
both in LSO and in Mono. This means that the sort is not stable. Since stability is a characteristic of Bubble Sort, it looks like the claim of using Bubble Sort is not correct. --Pedro Oval 20:01, 5 April 2014 (PDT)
maybe... needs an extended example to see if LSL backwards ordering isn't the culprit
-- Void (talk|contribs) 22:19, 5 April 2014 (PDT)
- If it's in reverse order, it's not stable either. The reverse would be 3,1,3,5,3,2 but the actual result is 3,5,3,1,3,2 --Pedro Oval 12:39, 6 April 2014 (PDT)
doh, you're right... comb sort perhaps? looking at the ordering exchange seems more likely than insertion
-- Void (talk|contribs) 17:20, 6 April 2014 (PDT)