Re: [boost] [library submission] smoothsort

David Abrahams wrote:
on Sun Dec 14 2008, Christopher Jefferson wrote:
I have often been surprised at the lack of an algorithms library in boost. There has often been times I've wished for a guarded or unguarded insertion sort, or riffle shuffle. Is his lack just down to no-one stepping forward to help write and maintain such a library of algorithms?
Seems like it
I seem to recall that at BoostCon this year, there was a push to extend the algorithm support in Boost as part of the Library in a Week program. Did anything significant come of that?
There's some stuff in the sandbox (some of which I wrote), but as far as I know, none has come up for review. I'm hoping to get off my duff and write some docs and get some of it reviewed before this year's BoostCon.
In case you are interesting in advanced search-algorithms as well, there is also a generic sequence searching template function in the vault. (Algorithms/single_pass_search) This algorithm is more generic than std::search (works with input-iterators) and has better worst case complexity at the same time. (See also http://www.codeproject.com/KB/stl/single_pass_search.aspx) Best Regards, Jim Xochellis ___________________________________________________________ Χρησιμοποιείτε Yahoo!; Βαρεθήκατε τα ενοχλητικά μηνύματα (spam); Το Yahoo! Mail διαθέτει την καλύτερη δυνατή προστασία κατά των ενοχλητικών μηνυμάτων http://login.yahoo.com/config/mail?.intl=gr

In case you are interesting in advanced search-algorithms as well, there is also a generic sequence searching template function in the vault. (Algorithms/single_pass_search) This algorithm is more generic than std::search (works with input-iterators) and has better worst case complexity at the same time. (See also http://www.codeproject.com/KB/stl/single_pass_search.aspx)
Maybe we should sort what's in the queue and group that into sub-libraries, such as: Boost.Algorithm.Search Boost.Algorithm.Sort Boost.Algorithm.Split (?) ... Not doing this right now may quickly result in a vast catalogue of heterogeneous routines, transforming Boost.Algorithm into Boost.HereBeDragons. -- EA

On 2008-12-16T19:11:01, Edouard A. wrote:
Maybe we should sort what's in the queue and group that into sub-libraries, such as:
Boost.Algorithm.Search Boost.Algorithm.Sort Boost.Algorithm.Split (?) ...
Not doing this right now may quickly result in a vast catalogue of heterogeneous routines, transforming Boost.Algorithm into Boost.HereBeDragons.
Tagging is a more flexible way of organizing information than an ontology. Searching becomes the preferred way to find information as the domain grows. To me it is also desirable to able to cherry pick the pieces instead of being forced to adopt the whole boost library. /Allan -- Allan Wind Life Integrity, LLC http://lifeintegrity.com

Not doing this right now may quickly result in a vast catalogue of heterogeneous routines, transforming Boost.Algorithm into Boost.HereBeDragons.
Tagging is a more flexible way of organizing information than an ontology. Searching becomes the preferred way to find information as the domain grows. To me it is also desirable to able to cherry pick the pieces instead of being forced to adopt the whole boost library.
I have not thought about different algorithms categories and I agree it could be hard (and useless ?) to categorize all the submissions that lands into Boost.Algorithm. Nevertheless, you will most likely need to group similar algorithms as they will certainly use the same basic functions. For sorting this is pretty obvious. The STL toolbox is limited to that aspect considering the large amount of existing strategies. Boost.Algorithm.Sorting could be that toolbox enabling you to arrange strategies to perfectly match your need (and of course providing default choices covering most of the usual cases). -- EA
participants (3)
-
Allan Wind
-
dpxguard-boost@yahoo.gr
-
Edouard A.