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 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,385be4c68a9e4de6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-07-11 13:04:34 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Smart sorting algorithm ?
Date: 11 Jul 2002 13:04:34 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0207111204.618a9bfa@posting.google.com>
References: <3D21D581.6EF6CB06@despammed.com>
 <3D2A0A25.52A62B7C@despammed.com>
 <ioGW8.83356$xy.28494668@twister.socal.rr.com>
 <3D2D98DB.39944A80@despammed.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.232.38.14
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1026417874 22549 127.0.0.1 (11 Jul 2002 20:04:34
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 11 Jul 2002 20:04:34 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:27008
Date: 2002-07-11T20:04:34+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Wes Groleau <wesgroleau@despammed.com> wrote in message news:<3D2D98DB.39944A80@despammed.com>...
> 
> The lookup table is created by doing the comparisons.
> And predicting some comparisons from others.
> Once that's done, the row with the N "this is first"
> entries is first.  Second is the row with N-1, etc.
> But the whole process still involves some comparisons.

Once again, this is a dead-end idea. It cannot possibly
be any help if you are using a good sorting algorithm
that minimizes comparisons in the first place, and if
minimizing comparisons is desirable, then that should
be the starting point, and you should forget about this
kludging around trying to repair bad sorting algorithms.