From: <dan...@ya...> - 2003-05-13 02:12:01
|
--- Oscar Fuentes <of...@wa...> wrote: > "Norman Vine" <nh...@ca...> writes: > > > Hi all > > > > Is it a known issue that qsort with MingW is > > often an order of magnitude slower then the > > Cygwin qsort ?? > > IMO, this claim is too vague. Could you provide a more precise > description, please? > > > If so should we add a qsort ? > > > > Attached is my port of the one from Newlib > > which seems to work fine and I believe has > > an appropriate license > > Have you modified that code at all? In what sense is it "a port"? From > where can we get guarantees about its correction, descriptions of its > behavior, etc? > > IMHO, it's not a good idea to replace the MSVCRT implementation, which > is a old known, extensively used qsort, with something else without a > *very* good reason. > I agree with Oscar. If you can show me some benchmark results with a range of sorts I might be interested. "Often an order of magnitude slower"is not good enough. I'd quess that MS qsort would "often" be faster with some problems or some machines. Danny > -- > Oscar > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara > The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions > www.enterpriselinuxforum.com > > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-users mailing list > Min...@li... > > You may change your MinGW Account Options or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-users http://mobile.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Mobile - Check & compose your email via SMS on your Telstra or Vodafone mobile. |