Talk:Sorting algorithms/Quicksort: Difference between revisions
→Task statement is buggy: Task cleanup, language advocacy. Civility, please.
(→Task statement is buggy: Task cleanup, language advocacy. Civility, please.) |
|||
Line 13:
Yeah, the problem statement is completely wrong. The algorithm described is not the real quicksort but a bastardized version that was promoted by the Haskell community that avoids mutation at the cost of asymptotically more space consumption and, consequently, it is practically worthless because it runs hundreds of times slower than a real quicksort (but it can be written concisely in Haskell!). The problem statement should be changed to a real in-place quicksort that actually works. --[[User:Jdh30|Jon Harrop]]
: I'm glad to see you finally created an account (I've been following your FFF blog for a while), but I should mention that vitriol is unwelcome, and vitriolic arguments against particular languages fall directly outside my [[User:Short Circuit#Language Promotion|language advocacy]] policy. I've tried finding the original definition of Quicksort a few times, but the original paper is hidden behind a paywall. If the task description requires cleanup, then so be it, but access to an authoritative source is lacking. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 19:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
==Algorithm description==
| |||