tim wrote:
> > You also don't need to hold back on giving stability garanties in the
> > documentation for jython's sake.
>
> I didn't <wink>. Stability doesn't come free, and for all I know, in
> another 3 years a method will be discovered that's 3x faster but not
> stable.
sounds like yet another reason to add two methods; one that
guarantees stability, and one that doesn't.
the only counter-argument I've seen from you is code bloat, but
I cannot see what stops us from mapping *both* methods to a
single implementation in CPython 2.3.
an alternative would be to add a sortlib module:
$ more Lib/sortlib.py
def stablesort(list):
list.sort() # 2.3's timsort is stable!
and a regression test script that makes sure that it really is stable
(can a test program ever be sure?)
</F>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4