From: Sam Schetterer (samthecppman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-24 18:36:53
On 3/22/07, Lewis Hyatt <lhyatt_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Sam-
>
> -I think you have done a good job of identifying specific goals for the
> library at this point. The focus on radix sorts, multikey sorts, etc,
> could
> eventually produce something very valuable. But you need to write a
> coherent set
> of timings and test cases to demonstrate conclusively that your code is
> easy to
> use and is better than std::sort. Quoting theoretical arguments from some
> book
> is not enough; you need concrete test cases to establish this.
>
> -Lewis
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://listarchives.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Ok. Here are the results, copied directly from the console:
Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
(C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator>cd C:\Documents and
Settings\Administrator\My Documents\Visual Studio 200
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\Visual Studio
2005\Projects\SortTimings\debug>SortTimings
Sorting 524287 floats
Radix Sort: 371154
std::sort: 1477776
Sorting 524287 ints
Radix Sort: 330806
std::sort: 1056781
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\Visual Studio
2005\Projects\SortTimings\debug>cd ..
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\Visual Studio
2005\Projects\SortTimings>cd debug
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\Visual Studio
2005\Projects\SortTimings\debug>SortTimings
Sorting 524287 floats
Radix Sort: 369263
std::sort: 1481086
Sorting 524287 ints
Radix Sort: 316077
std::sort: 1028627
C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\Visual Studio
2005\Projects\SortTimings\debug>
The timings are in microseconds, and this is on a Pentium 4, with 2.66 GHz,
on Microsoft Windows XP Professional. The example program is on vault, under
RadixSort vs std sort.zip.