JeLlyFish.software at gmx.net
Tue Nov 7 10:29:55 CET 2006
On Tuesday 07 November 2006 09:17, Micha Nelissen wrote:
> Chris Cheney wrote:
> > Of course, the efficient way to build a sorted list is to set
> > Sorted to False and to sort the list after all the items have been
> > added.
> It doesn't matter in O-time: both are O(n log n). Nevertheless, you
> probably will save some function call overhead.
That highly depends on the sorting algorithm used. A plain Quicksort has
a very bad worst case of O(n**2) that develops especially when the list
to be sorted already is. Even Bubblesort would be faster in such a
More information about the fpc-devel