JPDev@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 10 months agoReturns a sorted list in O(1) timeprogramming.devimagemessage-square27fedilinkarrow-up1294arrow-down114
arrow-up1280arrow-down1imageReturns a sorted list in O(1) timeprogramming.devJPDev@programming.dev to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 10 months agomessage-square27fedilink
minus-squaremcmodknower@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·10 months agoyou can even have a case where you return the first element of the list if the list is not empty, and it will still be O(1).
minus-squaremurtaza64@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up12·10 months agoyou can make it sort the first k elements and it will still be O(1). Set k high enough and it might even be useful
minus-squarexmunk@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up5·10 months agoI set k to 50,000,000,000… that’s more items than my shitty computer can fit in memory (including swsp) but I am now happy to celebrate my O(1) algorithm.
minus-squareKubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·10 months agoBy that logic, any sorting implementation is O(1), as the indexing variable/address type has limited size
you can even have a case where you return the first element of the list if the list is not empty, and it will still be O(1).
you can make it sort the first k elements and it will still be O(1). Set k high enough and it might even be useful
I set k to 50,000,000,000… that’s more items than my shitty computer can fit in memory (including swsp) but I am now happy to celebrate my O(1) algorithm.
By that logic, any sorting implementation is O(1), as the indexing variable/address type has limited size