Author: Michel Langeveld
Date: 09:26:37 10/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 1999 at 10:17:53, Dann Corbit wrote: >On October 23, 1999 at 10:36:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 22, 1999 at 10:03:29, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>Change to binary insertion and you will see a much bigger benefit. >> >>I tried both (from Knuth Sorting and Searching). Binary is very bad for >>lists that have 1-5 entries max. from testing on my machine. Simple >>insertion is no faster than the bubble sort I used, but it also turns out >>to be no slower either, after testing Crafty over 300 different positions. >> >>I think I'll leave insertion in, to prevent such discussions in the >>future, however. :) >I have found a new modification to insertion sort (binary or linear) that will >make a large improvement in speed. It has to do with the data movements to >perform the actual insertion. By delaying the insertion, I can do all data >movements as a single permutation and never move any element more than once. It >won't work for big lists though, since the code size is O(n!). With just ten >items there are a million leaves in the tree. However, for very small sublists >I think it will do very well. Best way to prove your statement is code it, and prove it's faster! Good news by the way.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.