Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!cbmehq!cbmger!peterk
From: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Re: Combsort algorithm
Message-ID: <1224@cbmger.UUCP>
Date: 14 May 91 13:42:48 GMT
References: <1991May13.073134.330@ulkyvx.bitnet>
Reply-To: peterk@cbmger.UUCP (Peter Kittel GERMANY)
Organization: Commodore Bueromaschinen GmbH, West Germany
Lines: 21

In article <1991May13.073134.330@ulkyvx.bitnet> krsear02@ulkyvx.bitnet (Kendall 'Opusii' Sears) writes:
>[oh for a real reader!]
>
>>I saw it briefly and was thrilled that BYTE had finally discovered shellsort.
>>If it beats heapsort, though, I may be wrong.  How does it work?
>> 
>>	-Colin
>This is exactly what I thought when I saw the article.  It was sad though,
>I remember a time when BYTE was one of the first mags to publish new algs
>but now they seem to be re-publishing other peoples' articles; the
>'shell-sort' was in a Compute! or Compute!'s Gazette (I don't remember which)
>way back when...  Geez am I *THAT* old?

But if you read the article thoroughly, you'll find that the authors
indeed know sell-sort and compare their algorithm to it, finding out
that the two are more different than from first sight. Combsort appears
to be much faster than shell-sort.

-- 
Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel  // E-Mail to  \\  Only my personal opinions... 
Commodore Frankfurt, Germany  \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk