quadsort
Presentations
| quadsort | Presentations | |
|---|---|---|
| 9 | 1 | |
| 2,106 | 7 | |
| - | - | |
| 4.6 | 10.0 | |
| 6 months ago | about 1 year ago | |
| C | C++ | |
| The Unlicense | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
quadsort
-
10~17x faster than what? A performance analysis of Intel x86-SIMD-sort (AVX-512)
https://github.com/scandum/quadsort/blob/f171a0b26cf6bd6f6dc...
As you can see, quadsort 1.1.4.1 used 2 instead of 4 writes in the bi-directional parity merges. This was in June 2021, and would have compiled as branchless with clang, but as branched with gcc.
When I added a compile time check to use ternary operations for clang I was not adapting your work. I was well aware that clang compiled ternary operations as branchless, but I wasn't aware that rust did as well. I added the compile time check to use ternary operations for a fair performance comparison against glidesort.
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/scandum/fluxsort/main/imag...
As for ipnsort's small sort, it is very similar to quadsort's small sort, which uses stable sorting networks, instead of unstable sorting networks. From my perspective it's not exactly novel. I didn't go for unstable sorting networks in crumsort to increase code reuse, and to not reduce adaptivity.
-
Show HN: QuadSort, Esoteric Fast Sort
In the code it looks like the seed to the benchmark can be provided as the 4th command line argument: https://github.com/scandum/quadsort/blob/master/src/bench.c#...
-
When does big-oh notation become not helpful when comparing algorithms?
If you look at sorting for example, it's been proven that you can't do a comparison-based sort faster than O(n logn). You may then think that we've already found the fastest possible sorting algorithms since Quicksort and Mergesort are already O(n logn). However, new sorting algorithms keep being invented, for example Quadsort. They're all still O(n logn), but they do offer a considerable speed improvement over more traditional algorithms
- quadsort 1.1.5.1: Up to 2.5x faster than qsort() on random data
- Quadsort 1.1.5.1: Introducing cost effective branchless merging
- I tried creating a sorting algorithm in C language.
Presentations
-
10~17x faster than what? A performance analysis of Intel x86-SIMD-sort (AVX-512)
If you look at the history of the author's own sorting implementation (ipnsort), it started as an attempt to port fluxsort to Rust:
https://github.com/Voultapher/Presentations/blob/master/rust...
It starts there, eventually the author abandons the linked PR because of a better approach found with ipnsort:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100856#issuecomment-1...
What are some alternatives?
pdqsort - Pattern-defeating quicksort.
sort-research-rs - Test and benchmark suite for sort implementations.
fluxsort - A fast branchless stable quicksort / mergesort hybrid that is highly adaptive.
rotate - A collection of array rotation algorithms.
blitsort - Blitsort is an in-place stable adaptive rotate mergesort / quicksort.
mountain-sort - The best algorithm to sort mountains
Klib - A standalone and lightweight C library
sort-test - A simple sort benchmarking tool
fastrange - A fast alternative to the modulo reduction
HSL - HSL to RGB and RGB to HSL