"While working on a proper complexity analysis of the algorithm, we realised that there was an error in the last paper reporting such a bug (http://envisage-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/sortin...). This implies that the correction implemented in the Java source code (changing Timsort stack size) is wrong and that it is still possible to make it break. This is explained in full details in our analysis: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.08612.pdf"
Re:On the Worst-Case Complexity of TimSort
by andrewla on Friday August 31, 2018 @09:20AM
(#17885315)
That is not additional information. That bug was created by the authors of this post, and the link is a reference to the exact paper linked to in this post.
"While working on a proper complexity analysis of the algorithm, we realised that there was an error in the last paper reporting such a bug (http://envisage-project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/sortin...). This implies that the correction implemented in the Java source code (changing Timsort stack size) is wrong and that it is still possible to make it break. This is explained in full details in our analysis: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.08612.pdf"