* * *

That's fair if the constant factor is relevant, but if bubble sort is terminating in any reasonable timescale then the difference between qsort, C++ std::sort, and a custom implementation is really not a factor.

People who don't compute much data don't need computer science.

But if you're comparing to bubblesort.....

There is a quirk (almost a bug?) in FreeBSD's qsort where it will switch to insertsort for the whole array under certain conditions, which we hit in production given how our data was arranged.

(I think this was the check) https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/blob/main/lib/libc/st...

I like how someone felt the need to write out insertion sort in some 4 line code golf challenge in the midst of qsort. This right here is why no one wants to deal with C anymore.

Did a bit of digging and found that there used to be a comment for why it was done, but it got removed [0] when they switched to the implementation from Bentley & McIlroy's "engineering a sort function" [1] around 1992.

[0]: https://github.com/weiss/original-bsd/commit/d3fcf71e0db57cb...

[1]: https://cs.fit.edu/~pkc/classes/writing/papers/bentley93engi...

Nonetheless, qsort() is available in libkern.

Not at the time that the bubble-sort code was used though. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36005209

You mean written. It's been available for many of the years that it has been used. (-:

No. In most languages sorting a container is `foo.sort()` or something similar. `qsort()` is much more faff.

I mean, clearly it wasn't good enough otherwise they would have used it, no? Perhaps integrating it was a huge faff.