I'm comfortable choosing sorting algorithms for a computer. Choosing a sorting algorithm for a human seems much harder.
For example, suppose you want to sort a shuffled deck cards. Quicksort seems too fiddly for a manual process with a relatively small (52) quantity.
miniblog.
Related Posts
It's so strange that we talk about languages being slow, and have done for years. Computer performance has increased so much in this time.
https://hbfs.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/is-python-slow/ (shared on HN in 2009) discusses Python being slow. My underpowered Thinkpad has 20x the single-threaded performance! https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/73vs3766/AMD-Athlon-64-4000+-vs-AMD-Ryzen-5-PRO-4650U
Maybe *relative* performance of languages matters more?
It's so strange that we talk about languages being slow, and have done for years. Computer performance has increased so much in this time.
https://hbfs.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/is-python-slow/ (shared on HN in 2009) discusses Python being slow. My underpowered Thinkpad has 20x the single-threaded perf!
Which programming languages are the easiest/hardest to google?
Go (a common word) and Rust (also a computer game) can both be tricky. Yet I've not seen 'rubylang' used to help Ruby searches.
Perhaps a novel word (Kotlin) or a misspelling (Perl) is a better choice for new languages?