Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test
by tankenmate on Friday October 14, 2016 @04:44AM
(#12706825)
Apart from the fact that it isn't always the best sorting algorithm and it's pathological worst case is in fact as bad as a bubble sort's worst case (O(n^2) with a higher base operational cost, as at least bubble sort's worst case is somewhat cache friendly). This happens in three cases; 1) all the elements are sorted in descending order, 2) all the elements are sorted in ascending order, or 3) a special case of 1) and 2) combined, all the elements are equal.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test
by PetahNZ on Thursday October 13, 2016 @06:38PM
(#12704733)
Because its quick, right?
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test
by thechao on Friday October 14, 2016 @12:35AM
(#12706157)
It also sorts.
Re:Google's “Director of Engineering” Hiring Test
by danesparza on Friday October 14, 2016 @09:14AM
(#12707818)
Also: It has a cool name. It's much better than 'slowsort'
But could they at least tell you why quick sort was the best sorting algorithm?