The efforts of developing better sorting algorithms like driftsort/ipnsort and better hash functions like foldhash make my life as developer so much simpler. No matter how clever I try to be, most often just using foldhash hashmap or a sort_unstable is the fastest option
Efficiency, not effectiveness. They are all effective in the sense that they produce sorted results. Even the non-modern sort algorithms are effective in the sense that the results are correct. This should be about the efficiency with which they do it, right?
Agreed. Effectiveness would imply that some algorithms are more likely to sort the list correctly than others, or they sort a higher percentage of elements. Efficiency is about factors external to the correctness
The efforts of developing better sorting algorithms like driftsort/ipnsort and better hash functions like foldhash make my life as developer so much simpler. No matter how clever I try to be, most often just using foldhash hashmap or a sort_unstable is the fastest option
Double jaw-drop. First when the (dynamic) match was slower than the hash map, second when sort_unstable was faster than the hash map!
Cool article. It's clear that all my theoretical algorithm-knowledge comes short when faced with real CPUs.
Efficiency, not effectiveness. They are all effective in the sense that they produce sorted results. Even the non-modern sort algorithms are effective in the sense that the results are correct. This should be about the efficiency with which they do it, right?
Agreed. Effectiveness would imply that some algorithms are more likely to sort the list correctly than others, or they sort a higher percentage of elements. Efficiency is about factors external to the correctness
Isn't this just another case of premature optimization? Shouldn't you be adjusting sorting algorithms only when customer complains?