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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fc89c,97188312486d4578 X-Google-Attributes: gidfc89c,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,baaf5f793d03d420 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,6154de2e240de72a X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,97188312486d4578 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Teaching sorts [was Re: What's the best language to start with?] Date: 1996/08/17 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 174772698 distribution: inet references: <4umeot$re2@hil-news-svc-2.compuserve.com> <4v2fb9$lpj@news.utdallas.edu> <4v2qkd$40f@news1.mnsinc.com> organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.unix.programmer,comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-08-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: "Wrong order. An O(n) program where n=1,000 that takes 1 second to complete should be able to finish n=2,000 in 2 seconds, not the other way around. In other words, you can't derive time complexity by timing an algorithm, *especially* with only two samples." This statement is wrong (big-O seems to be generating a lot of confusion). big-O notation is about asymptotic behavior. If you know an algorithm is O(N) and you know that the time for n=1000 is one second, you know ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the time for n=2000, NOTHING AT ALL! For example, suppose the behavior of an algorithm is for n up to 1000, time is 1 second for n greater than 1000, time is 1000*n seconds that's clearly O(N), but the time for 2000 items will be 2_000_000 seconds. A good reference for big-O notation is Mike Feldman's data structure book. It emphasizes big-O more than some other books at this level, and has a clear explanation and some nice examples. If everyone reads this we will have a clearer discussion here (and avoid things like O(2N) :-) Of course what it has to do with the origins of the thread is obscure :-)