Re^7: Perl is dying (better sorting than the ST)

It is one level of indirection harder and perhaps doesn't have as many "cool points."

⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

Comment on Re^7: Perl is dying (better sorting than the ST)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Better sorting than the ST by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Jan 11, 2007 at 21:03 UTC
I admit I never thought about the former. I did think of the latter, and it’s consistent with one of the weaknesses I see in the Perl community (namely the tendency to pick clever and shorter-looking solutions), which is why I will now often point out this approach when people talk about the ST. Hmm. Interesting thought. It won’t stop me from advocating this approach, but it’s a much more complete explanation of the ST’s prevalence than I had before. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]
Re^8: Perl is dying (better sorting than the ST) by parv (Parson) on Jan 10, 2007 at 06:12 UTC
By "It", did you mean Aristotle's method or GRT\|ST?	[reply]
Re^9: Perl is dying (better sorting than the ST) by diotalevi (Canon) on Jan 10, 2007 at 06:14 UTC
Sorting the indexes is one step removed from sorting the elements directly. ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊	[reply]