| WELCOME |
 |
|
An algorithm of a different order (O(n log n)) was also implemented and tested. While this algorithm is far harder to understand and to implement, th e speed advantages are phenomenal. Quick Sort is extemely complex but the just of it is that it picks a value, makes two puts all the values higher than the chosen value on one side, and the rest on the other, then repeats for each of the new segments. When any segment is of length 1, it is left unchanged for the remainder of the sorting.
The graphs show what an algorithm this complex can do as far as speed goes. It is on average 100 times faster than Bubble sort, and as array sizes increase so does its relative advantage.
The results are all what one would expect except perhaps the sorted (forwards and backwards) arrays, where shell sort seems to have the advantage over quick. Interestingly enough, quicksort, seems to not do too well with these sort of arrays. This proves my point earlier on that each of the sorts have their uses - there is no one sort that "has it all".
Quick Sort is extemely complex but the just of it is that it picks a value, makes two puts all the values higher than the chosen value on one side, and the rest on the other, then repeats for each of the new segments. When any segment is of length 1, it is left unchanged for the remainder of the sorting.
The graphs show what an algorithm this complex can do as far as speed goes. It is on average 100 times faster than Bubble sort, and as array sizes increase so does its relative advantage.
Dean Casalena |
|
| LATEST NEWS |
|
|
21-03-04
The graphs show what an algorithm this complex can do as far as speed goes. It is on average 100 times faster than Bubble sort, and as array sizes increase so does its relative advantage.
The results are all what one would expect except perhaps the sorted (forwards and backwards) arrays, where shell sort seems to have the advantage over quick. Interestingly enough, quicksort, seems to not do too well with these sort of arrays. This proves my point earlier on that each of the sorts have their uses - there is no one sort that "has it all".
The results are all what one would expect except perhaps the sorted (forwards and backwards) arrays, where shell sort seems to have the advantage over quick. Interestingly enough, quicksort, seems to not do too well with these sort of arrays. This proves my point earlier on that each of the sorts have their uses - there is no one sort that "has it all". |
