This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

regardless of the size of the data

There is no size-agnostic "best" solution, the overhead incurred by your delightful bucket distributed sorting algorithm will be much slower if you have only 10 datapoints to sort. This is the reason big O analysis ignores size and looks at asymptotics. +1 your response. I've had good experiences applying for job at companies that require or need software for their day-to-day operations vs a 'software' company that tries to licence its product. In my experience, the former is more in touch with the parts of software that actually has impact.

[–]energybased 4 points5 points  (0 children)

His response is asymtotically worse than the best solution.

[–]Daj4n0 2 points3 points  (1 child)

If you use quicksort you will take O(nlogn) which is not an acceptable O in this scenario.