Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 10:21:50 +0100 From: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> To: Robert Clausecker <fuz@fuz.su>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposal adding new sorting algorithm, bsort() to libc Message-ID: <b0a7955f-7fb2-cb48-ac7d-089b824eb189@selasky.org> In-Reply-To: <1e609631-37e2-3818-37e3-72773758ff40@selasky.org> References: <c7df2462-e0b7-f98c-d45d-ed1c185a2e07@selasky.org> <YxnziKoQzkSDlgts@fuz.su> <1e609631-37e2-3818-37e3-72773758ff40@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 9/8/22 16:19, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > On 9/8/22 15:52, Robert Clausecker wrote: >>> See: >>> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D36493 >> >> Looks interesting! Any particular reason you add a new function to the >> libc instead of just replacing qsort(3) with the new algorithm? >> >> Yours, >> Robert Clausecker >> > > Hi, > > It's a good question. My plan was first to establish the concept about > bsort() and then at some point remove qsort() and make those qsort() > functions symbol aliases for bsort(). > > There are several write-ups about "trying to fix qsort()". Here is a > link for one of them: > > https://www.raygard.net/2022/02/27/Re-engineering-a-qsort-part-4/ > > The question is, if there is a fix for qsort() in FreeBSD, will there be > a fix in other operating systems too? That's one argument for giving > bitonic sort an own name. > > --HPS > Update - interested parties - please have a look! https://reviews.freebsd.org/D36493 --HPS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b0a7955f-7fb2-cb48-ac7d-089b824eb189>