Talk:Order two numerical lists: Difference between revisions

: This probably should be marked draft until decided. --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 03:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

: Adding in extra conditions like stable sort when the task is NOT marked draft is rather bad form --[[User:Dgamey|Dgamey]] 03:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

==Test Cases==

I found the description a bit confusing at first. I used the following test cases where demo_list_llt was a wrapper to support my interpretation.

<pre> write()

demo_list_llt([-1],[0]) # << ok

demo_list_llt([0],[0]) # == fail

demo_list_llt([0],[-1]) # >> fail

write()

demo_list_llt([0],[0,-1]) # << ok

demo_list_llt([0],[0,0]) # << ok

demo_list_llt([0],[0,1]) # << ok

demo_list_llt([0,-1],[0]) # >> fail

demo_list_llt([0,0],[0]) # >> fail

demo_list_llt([0,0],[1]) # << ok</pre>

With the following output:<pre>[ 1 2 1 3 2 ] << [ 1 2 0 4 4 0 0 0 ] - FAILS

[ -1 ] << [ 0 ]

[ 0 ] << [ 0 ] - FAILS

[ 0 ] << [ -1 ] - FAILS

[ 0 ] << [ 0 -1 ]

[ 0 ] << [ 0 0 ]

[ 0 ] << [ 0 1 ]

[ 0 -1 ] << [ 0 ] - FAILS

[ 0 0 ] << [ 0 ] - FAILS

[ 0 0 ] << [ 1 ]</pre>

The wrapper and support routine in Icon was <pre>

procedure demo_list_llt(L1,L2)

write(list2string(L1)," << ",list2string(L2),if list_llt(L1,L2) then "" else " - FAILS")

end

procedure list2string(L1)

every (s := "[") ||:= " " || (!L1|"]")

return s

end</pre>