9
Parzi
48d

Cengage's shit wanted me to rewrite Bubble Sort in Python. The test also said bubble sort was "the most efficient sorting method."

How does one slap someone in the face with a concept? Someone's getting their shit pushed in with timsort.

Comments
  • 6
    Really?

    I find it hard to believe that even a noob would claim that bubblesort was efficient. That's literally the first thing they teach everyone about bubblesort.
  • 1
    @RememberMe yeah no, this was on a test written by Cengage. You'd think that they'd know better, but no. Of fucking course not.
  • 1
    There is somewhere an animation of different sorting algorithms.
  • 2
    @RememberMe
    I'm gonna be really generous here and assume they're referring to the fact that coded correctly it has O(1) space complexity. O(n^2) runtime is pretty bad though.
  • 1
    @SortOfTested I mean, so does any in-place sort so that's not much of a benefit

    And given that it goes over the whole array again and again I can't imagine it being all that cache friendly

    (Then again expecting performance out of bubblesort is pointless anyway)
  • 2
    @RememberMe
    Hence, generosity.
  • 2
    @stop All over my YouTube recommendations, for example. They're a separate genre of videos with their own little community and circlejerk.
  • 1
    @Lor-inc There's your first mistake "YouTube's recommendations"
  • 1
    @Jilano Alternative?
  • 2
    @Lor-inc Well, you could always try to find what you're looking for on a PeerTube instance, but the goal of my previous comment was to complain about YouTube's recommendation system. It sucks, plain and simple. As for the service itself, there is no real alternative, unfortunately.
  • 1
    @Jilano That's why it sucks.
Add Comment