Talk:Sorting algorithms/Quicksort: Difference between revisions
a bug in task description |
|||
Line 1:
==Task statement is buggy==
If array elements are all equal then pseudocode's version of quicksort never returns. [[User:A|A]] 14:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
----
Details I'm uncertain on:
* Should it be the in-place form of quicksort, or is it unspecified?
|
Revision as of 14:52, 14 July 2008
Task statement is buggy
If array elements are all equal then pseudocode's version of quicksort never returns. A 14:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Details I'm uncertain on:
- Should it be the in-place form of quicksort, or is it unspecified?
- What is a discrete type?
- Should the program as given work for all arrays with indexes "of any discrete type", or should I pick one "discrete type" and give an example with that?
--Kevin Reid 15:42, 3 October 2007 (MDT)
- I'd say follow example of the Bubble Sort page (from which I stole the text). In other words, do whatever is most comfortable in your language, perhaps pointing out the design choices made. --IanOsgood 19:02, 3 October 2007 (MDT)
Algorithm description
Would someone care to add some text describing the Quicksort algorithm? I.e., its worst-case completion time, a pseudocode implementation, what the pivot does, etc. --Short Circuit 03:28, 7 October 2007 (MDT)
UnixPipes solution
It seems to me that the UnixPipes implementation violates the conditions given on Category:UnixPipes: There you find:
- It does not include programming problems solved with normal shell by using the control structures available as a part of shell outside of pipelines.
However the quicksort implementation here uses the following shell constructs:
- named function
- while loop
- case statement
So either the example, or the UnixPipes description is wrong. --Ce 15:41, 7 April 2008 (MDT)
The intension in UnixPipes description is to include only those solutions that use the pipelines as computational paradigm. (So as to exclude the imperative solutions in normal shell) Since I do not seem to have captured the intension correctly, I will remove that line from UnixPipelines until I can think of a better way to put it. Thanks for the attention. Rahul 02:36, 8 April 2008 (MDT)