Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:80188
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.212.179 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: julienpauli@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CABBJUpcSLSQ=etZ7NYKcOR+Kcvkga=Op-BR_KcqOE-5S3H70og@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABBJUpcxizh-SMQNOYX4Ejr6sOnoGw-78Nz28Db4JKWwNd9XCw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABBJUpcSLSQ=etZ7NYKcOR+Kcvkga=Op-BR_KcqOE-5S3H70og@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 18:27:42 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMUwpuQodU3r54bna_XJoR8FN5KXTvOT1UMdBvTgFnxZK3Appw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Xinchen Hui <laruence@php.net>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, 
	Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043891d16651e8050beb0423
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Faster zend sorting implementation
From: jpauli@php.net (Julien Pauli)

--f46d043891d16651e8050beb0423
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:09 PM, Xinchen Hui <laruence@php.net> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Xinchen Hui <laruence@php.net> wrote:
> > Hey:
> >
> >      I was working on zend_qsort improvement. but I got a problem need
> > to be disscussed with you fist..
> first
> >
> >      as we know,  previously zend_qsort is not a stable sorting algo.
> >
> >      my draft patch (which already get 0.1% IRs reduce in wordpress)
> > is kindof a stable sorting algo, you can find it here
> > (https://github.com/laruence/php-src/compare/zend_sort)
> >
> >      so, there is a bc break, like for :
> >
> >      $array = array("o",  "O");
> >      sort($array, SORT_STRING|SORT_FLAG_CASE);
> >
> >      var_dump($array);
> >
> >      previously implementation does the swap:
> >
> > array(2) {
> >   [0]=>
> >   string(1) "O"
> >   [1]=>
> >   string(1) "o"
> > }
> >
> >      but new implementation doesn't not:
> does not
> >
> > array(2) {
> >   [0]=>
> >   string(1) "o"
> >   [1]=>
> >   string(1) "O"
>
> }
>

Hum, I dont think such a BC is acceptable.

There are tons of userland code out there relying on alpha case sorting
that could get impacted....
IMO :-)

Q: why extract the swap function from the qsort algo ? Is there an interest
of replacing it at runtime ?


Julien.P

--f46d043891d16651e8050beb0423--