I do not know if the review manager has a say in this but based on the remarks of the reviewers I would like to see the library as accepted be named 'SpreadSort' rather than just 'Sort'. I do think that Boost can have a library called 'Sort' but I agree with the general consensus that a 'Sort' library needs more than one type of sorting algorithm. I would like to see other people, who mentioned in the reviews/comments that they have their own sorting implementation, also submit their own implementations to Boost and, if this happens and they are accepted, I can see combining them with 'SpreadSort' into a general Boost sorting library called 'Sort' in the future.
I think this is a very reasonable proposal.
Regarding the possible future additions: I would absolutely love to submit my own sorting algorithm implementations. I first need to find time to remove a few rough edges before I would even dare to publish my code, but thank you for the encouragement. :-)
One possible way to handle classic algorithms is to integrate them with
the tests I wrote for Spreadsort, and verify they show a significant benefit relative to the existing libraries for some subset of realistic cases and don't have any major bugs. Then a mini-review of the the API and documentation might be appropriate. Here are some potential standard algorithms that it might be nice to add in the future: LSD radix sort, for fixed-length data where stability matters Timsort, a stable comparison sort that is fast for mostly-sorted data and is used by standard Java implementations. A sorting network based comparison sort for small and fixed-size datasets. I've found these to be about twice as fast as Insertionsort. k-way merge parallel sort