ANN: blist 1.2.0

[Terry Reedy]

On 7/22/2010 7:22 PM, Daniel Stutzbach wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu

> That's a good point.  It's tempting to add an undocumented parameter to
> blist.sort that selects the sorting algorithm to use, to make it make it
> easier to test multiple algorithms.  There are probably several
> different ways to achieve a similar effect.  Do you mind if we table
> that discussion until I actually have a patch?

Definitely. That will not be my decision. Since you seem serious about 
this, I decided to give you a preview of the questions to expect, and 
suggest some to answer in your initial filing.

Another sort of issue will be code maintainability. Two algorithms is 
potentially more problems than one. To me, that partly depends on how 
well factored the current code is. It would be best is rsort were a 
switch replacement for timsort after all preparations (such as decorate) 
were done. I will leave that for you to address when you file.

And that is about all I can think of.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy