From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,a644fa9cd1a3869a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-11 04:42:18 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!opentransit.net!wanadoo.fr!proxad.net!feeder2-1.proxad.net!news1-2.free.fr!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3BEE6102.805CF8DC@free.fr> Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2001 12:29:06 +0100 From: Jean-Marc Bourguet X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.10 i586) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: List container strawman 1.2 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Guest of ProXad - France NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Nov 2001 13:42:17 MET NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.228.43.197 X-Trace: 1005482537 news1-2.free.fr 32064 213.228.43.197 X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16272 Date: 2001-11-11T13:42:17+01:00 List-Id: Steven Deller wrote: > Jean-Marc Bourguet has it pretty much right, though I would prefer a > heap sort instead of a merge sort. A heap sort is also guaranteed > O(NlogN) time, and also can be done "in place" more easily. A merge sort is O (N log N) and is in place for linked lists. I don't see how you can do an heap sort with linked list without additionnal data. -- Jean-Marc