[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on'
From: |
Michael Heerdegen |
Subject: |
Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on' |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Feb 2024 08:40:08 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev> writes:
> The other alternative (suggested by Daniel) is to add a yet another
> optional argument - whether to do the schwartz transform - so it would
> be on the caller to determine whether the accessor is costly enough.
This would be my preferred solution, too
> This is not my first choice, but I'd still prefer it over having two
> different but very similar functions. sort-on is slower than it has to
> be, too.
It could be improved? How?
BTW, I wonder how this addition fits into my original suggestion about
sort predicate construction. I guess we would want to allow to choose
between using schwartz or not (at each level) in the specification -
which would mean that my approach would build a sort function, not a
sort predicate. Which also might allow to build more efficient code.
Being able to choose a sort function at run-time is useless anyway.
Michael.
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', (continued)
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Dmitry Gutov, 2024/02/04
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Yuri Khan, 2024/02/05
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/05
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Dmitry Gutov, 2024/02/05
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/05
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Dmitry Gutov, 2024/02/05
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Eli Zaretskii, 2024/02/05
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on', Dmitry Gutov, 2024/02/05
- Re: master 4b79c80c999 1/2: New function 'sort-on',
Michael Heerdegen <=