Talk:Order by pair comparisons
Nice problem. What would you think of 'Interactive sort' or 'User defined sorting' as a title? One minor thing is the description says "the user states which item is less than, equal to, or greater than the other". Should it just be less than? It is interesting seeing the different approaches and how the questions are ordered. Garbanzo (talk) 06:13, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Garbanzo, I think of the intaractive nature and the pair comparisons as being important "Order by interactive pair comparisons" might be more descriptive, but is even longer. --Paddy3118 (talk) 19:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- On comparison questions: I didn't want to restrict or dictate an algorithm to use beyond something that didn't just blindly ask comparisons on all possible pairs.I knew one way to do it, others can find better ways for their needs and languages.
- --Paddy3118 (talk) 19:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
- Not restricting the algorithm is good, but to me it sounded like <, =, and > were all required. Would adding duplicates be good for extra credit? That could be harder. I tried using the custom comparer in the C++ library sort on some bigger sets and got some interesting results when giving inconsistent answers (answering that red < orange < yellow < red) - I got it in a loop once. Solutions could remember previous answers given by the users. Garbanzo (talk) 07:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)