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=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,e0c23e7a19a435c4 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,CP1252 Received: by 10.68.220.230 with SMTP id pz6mr8095617pbc.3.1340480431047; Sat, 23 Jun 2012 12:40:31 -0700 (PDT) Path: l9ni11757pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Austin Obyrne Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_Recapping_on_=93Bug_Sort=94=2E?= Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 12:40:30 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: References: <169bdbcb-cb43-4db9-9d48-3be2a88473eb@googlegroups.com> <77963856-3a25-4477-9510-769df7a9b85c@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 31.52.108.135 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1340480430 19115 127.0.0.1 (23 Jun 2012 19:40:30 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 19:40:30 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=31.52.108.135; posting-account=pmkN8QoAAAAtIhXRUfydb0SCISnwaeyg User-Agent: G2/1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: 2012-06-23T12:40:30-07:00 List-Id: On Saturday, June 23, 2012 8:07:58 PM UTC+1, Austin Obyrne wrote: > On Saturday, June 23, 2012 7:05:56 PM UTC+1, Niklas Holsti wrote: > > On 12-06-23 13:20 , Austin Obyrne wrote: > > > On Saturday, June 23, 2012 8:54:52 AM UTC+1, Austin Obyrne wrote: > > >> On Friday, June 22, 2012 9:45:53 PM UTC+1, Jeffrey Carter wrote: > > >>> On 06/22/2012 12:55 PM, Austin Obyrne wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> I have been told that my program resembles a known sort program ca= lled > > >>>> =93Counting Sort=94. I would hate to be guilty of plagiarism and = I would like to > > >>>> point out therefore that the salient thing about my =93Parallel So= rt=94 is that > > >>>> my implementation is geared to capturing data during any unrelated= program > > >>>> run-time and assigning the data in such a way that the separate el= ements > > >>>> index their own addresses in the sorting arrays. A similarity wit= h some > > >>>> other existing paper algorithm is simply fortuitous. > > >>> > > >>> What you have presented is an implementation of counting sort, noth= ing more. > > >>> There is nothing new or unique about your implementation. > >=20 > > Austin, > >=20 > > While I agree with Jeff that you have rediscovered Counting Sort, this= =20 > > does not mean that you are being accused of plagiarism. It is common fo= r=20 > > programmers to rediscover algorithms that are basically simple, but ver= y=20 > > good for some special cases -- and perhaps for just these reasons are= =20 > > not very well known. > >=20 > > I could imagine posing this sorting problem (sorting a dense set of=20 > > numbers in a known, not too wide range) in a class on programming (not= =20 > > an advanced class, either) and would expect some of the students to use= =20 > > this method (i.e. Counting Sort) in their solutions. > >=20 > > > Update on performance. > > > > > > 42750 seven-digit positive integers were sorted in between 1 and 2 se= conds. > > > > > > Waiting to hear regarding "Count Sort". > >=20 > > Since your method is an implementation of Counting Sort, you are=20 > > actually measuring "Counting Sort", at least in one implementation. > >=20 > > --=20 > > Niklas Holsti > > Tidorum Ltd > > niklas holsti tidorum fi > > . @ . >=20 > Thanks for that. >=20 > The very salient thing that everybody is missing is the way the data is c= ollected and sorted simultaneously in "Parallel Sort" compared to Count Sor= t. Parallel Sort is more a piece of computer science being implemeted in t= he Ada programming language. >=20 > Frankly I am not familiar with Count Sort in practise (being a comparison= program puts it beyond the pale to me ) but can I ask you one question tha= t will make my point more clearly. >=20 > If I asked you to demonstrate "Count Sort" being used to sort a specimen = set of data how would you go about making the data available to the program= . >=20 > Somewhere along the line you would have to prepare an external batch file= for reading in or you would key in the data interactively - it has to be l= ike that all the time with Count Sort - herein lies the difference - my pro= gram captures the data in parallel at the very origin ie as it is computed = - no double handling =3D> huge time and labour saving. >=20 > The counting part is trivial. It is the capturing concept that is the im= portant difference between what I am calling Parallel Sort and what anyone = else may call Count Sort . The counting is almost benign when the elements= of data index their own addresses in an array in both cases. =20 >=20 > There is only a very tenuous connection in this fact however, plus that b= oth sort programs eschew all comparisom methods and simply count the data a= ccording to magnitude as the means of sorting it. This common factor is not= sufficient in itself however in my view to be grounds for any one to say t= hat they are largely related versions of the same program. They have only = a very small amount in common. It is a huge leap from my parallel program t= o the count sort program in doing this - they have far too little in common= to be lumped together like this. >=20 > I await your answer on how is the data introduced to a sort program that = you would use at home say. >=20 > Regards, >=20 > Austin. Correction : Count Sort is not a comparison based sort program - I got mixe= d up with "Quick Sort".