<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>recursive solution &#8211; stoimen&#039;s web log</title>
	<atom:link href="/tag/recursive-solution/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link></link>
	<description>on web development</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:18:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=5.0.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Computer Algorithms: Quicksort</title>
		<link>/2012/03/13/computer-algorithms-quicksort/</link>
		<comments>/2012/03/13/computer-algorithms-quicksort/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Mar 2012 21:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stoimen]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brilliant sorting algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bubble sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divide and conquer algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elegant general purpose sorting algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[elegant solution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[faster algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insertion sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Merge sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PHP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[purpose sorting algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quicksort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Recursion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recursive solution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Selection algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sorting algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spreadsort]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=2899</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Introduction When it comes to sorting items by comparing them merge sort is one very natural approach. It is natural, because simply divides the list into two equal sub-lists then sort these two partitions applying the same rule. That is a typical divide and conquer algorithm and it just follows the intuitive approach of speeding &#8230; <a href="/2012/03/13/computer-algorithms-quicksort/" class="more-link">Continue reading <span class="screen-reader-text">Computer Algorithms: Quicksort</span> <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a><div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href="/2010/06/18/friday-algorithms-iterative-quicksort/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: Iterative Quicksort">Friday Algorithms: Iterative Quicksort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2010/06/11/friday-algorithms-quicksort-difference-between-php-and-javascript/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: Quicksort &#8211; Difference Between PHP and JavaScript">Friday Algorithms: Quicksort &#8211; Difference Between PHP and JavaScript </a></li>
<li><a href="/2010/06/25/friday-algorithms-sorting-a-set-of-integers-far-quicker-than-quicksort/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: Sorting a Set of Integers &#8211; Far Quicker than Quicksort!">Friday Algorithms: Sorting a Set of Integers &#8211; Far Quicker than Quicksort! </a></li>
<li><a href="/2012/03/05/computer-algorithms-merge-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Merge Sort">Computer Algorithms: Merge Sort </a></li>
</ol>
</div>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>When it comes to sorting items by comparing them <a href="/2012/03/05/computer-algorithms-merge-sort/" title="Computer Algorithms: Merge Sort">merge sort</a> is one very natural approach. It is natural, because simply divides the list into two equal sub-lists then sort these two partitions applying the same rule. That is a typical divide and conquer algorithm and it just follows the intuitive approach of speeding up the sorting process by reducing the number of comparisons. However there are other “divide and conquer” sorting algorithms that do not follow the merge sort scheme, while they have practically the same success. Such an algorithm is quicksort.</p>
<h2>Overview</h2>
<p>Back in 1960 <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Hoare" title="C. A. R. Hoare" target="_blank">C. A. R. Hoare</a> comes with a brilliant sorting algorithm. In general quicksort consists of some very simple steps. First we’ve to choose an element from the list (called a pivot) then we must put all the elements with value less than the pivot on the left side of the pivot and all the items with value greater than the pivot on its right side. After that we must repeat these steps for the left and the right sub-lists. That is quicksort! Simple and elegant! </p>
<p><figure id="attachment_2908" style="width: 620px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort.png" alt="Quicksort" title="Quicksort" width="620" height="399" class="size-full wp-image-2908" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort.png 620w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort-300x193.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 620px) 100vw, 620px" /></a><figcaption class="wp-caption-text"> </figcaption></figure><span id="more-2899"></span></p>
<p>It is a pure divide and conquer approach as merge sort, but while merge sort’s tricky part was merging the sorted sub-lists, in quicksort there are other things to consider. </p>
<p>First of all obviously the choice of a pivot is the bottleneck. Indeed it all depends on that pivot. Imagine that you choose the greatest value from the list &#8211; than you’ve to put all the other items of the list into the “left” sub-list. If you do that on each step you’ll practically go into the worst scenario and that is no good. The thing is that in the worst case quicksort is not so effective and it’s practically as slow as bubble sort and insertion sort. The good thing is that in practice with randomly generated lists there is not a high possibility to go into the worst case of quicksort.</p>
<h3>Choosing a pivot</h3>
<p>Of course the best pivot is the middle element from the list. Thus the list will be divided into two fairly equal sub-lists. The problem is that there’s not an easy way to get the middle element from a list and this will slow down the algorithm. So typically we can get for a pivot the first or the last item of the list.</p>
<p>After choosing a pivot the rest is simple. Put every item with a greater value on the right and every item with a lesser value on the left. Then we must sort the left and right sub-lists just as we did with the initial list. </p>
<p><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/MerginginQuicksort.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/MerginginQuicksort.png" alt="Merging in Quicksort" title="Merging in Quicksort" width="620" height="399" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-2910" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/MerginginQuicksort.png 620w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/MerginginQuicksort-300x193.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 620px) 100vw, 620px" /></a></p>
<p>It’s clear that with this algorithm naturally we’re going into a recursive solution. Typically every divide and conquer approach is easy to implement with recursion. But because recursion can be heavy, there is an iterative approach.</p>
<h2>Implementation</h2>
<p>As I said above recursive approach is something very natural for quicksort as it follows the divide and conquer principles. On each step we divide the list in two and we pass those sub-lists to our recursive function. But recursion is dangerous sometimes, so an iterative approach is also available. Typically iterative approaches “model” recursion with extra memory and a model of a stack, which is our case. Here we have two examples of quicksort &#8211; recursive and iterative in PHP. Let’s go first with the recursion.</p>
<h3>Recursive Quicksort</h3>
<pre lang="PHP">
$list = array(5,3,9,8,7,2,4,1,6,5);
 
// recursive
function quicksort($array)
{
	if (count($array) == 0) {
    	return array();
	}
 
	$pivot = $array[0];
	$left = $right = array();
 
	for ($i = 1; $i < count($array); $i++) {
		if ($array[$i] < $pivot) {
			$left[] = $array[$i];
		} else {
			$right[] = $array[$i];
		}
	}
	
	return array_merge(quicksort($left), array($pivot), quicksort($right));
}

// 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
print_r(quicksort($list));
</pre>
<h3>Iterative Quicksort</h3>
<pre lang="PHP">
$list = array(5,3,9,8,7,2,4,1,6,5);

// iterative
function quicksort_iterative($array)
{
    $stack = array($array);
    $sorted = array();
 
    while (count($stack) > 0) {
 
        $temp = array_pop($stack);
 
        if (count($temp) == 1) {
            $sorted[] = $temp[0];
            continue;
        }
 
        $pivot = $temp[0];
        $left = $right = array();
 
        for ($i = 1; $i < count($temp); $i++) {
            if ($pivot > $temp[$i]) {
                $left[] = $temp[$i];
            } else {
                $right[] = $temp[$i];
            }
        }
 
        $left[] = $pivot;
 
        if (count($right))
            array_push($stack, $right);
        if (count($left))
            array_push($stack, $left);
    }
 
    return $sorted;
}

// 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
print_r(quicksort_iterative($list));
</pre>
<h2>Complexity</h2>
<p>The complexity of quicksort in the average case is O(n*log(n)) - same as Merge sort. The problem is that in the worst case it is O(n<sup>2</sup>) - same as bubble sort. Obviously the worst case is when we have an already sorted list, and we constantly take for a pivot the last element of the list. But we should consider that in practice we don’t quite use sorted lists that we have to sort again, right?</p>
<p><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort.Average.Worst_.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort.Average.Worst_.png" alt="Quicksort average and worst case scenarios" title="Quicksort.Average.Worst" width="600" height="371" class="alignnone size-full wp-image-2909" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort.Average.Worst_.png 600w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Quicksort.Average.Worst_-300x185.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 600px) 100vw, 600px" /></a></p>
<h2>Application</h2>
<p>Quicksort is a great sorting algorithm and developers often go for it, but let's see some pros and cons of it.</p>
<h3>Why using quicksort</h3>
<ol>
<li>Recursive implementation is easy</li>
<li>In general its speed is same as merge sort - O(n*log(n))</li>
<li>Elegant solution with no tricky merging as merge sort</li>
</ol>
<h3>Why not using quicksort</h3>
<ol>
<li>As slow as bubble sort in the worst case!</li>
<li>Iterative implementation isn't easy</li>
<li>There are faster algorithms for some sets of data types</li>
</ol>
<p>Quicksort is beautiful because of the elegant idea behind its principles. Indeed if you have two sorted lists one with items with a greater value from a given value and the other with items smaller form that given value you can simply concatenate them and you can be sure that the resulting list will be sorted with no need of special merge. </p>
<p>In fact quicksort is a very elegant general purpose sorting algorithm and every developer should be familiar with its principles.</p>
<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>
<p>Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href="/2010/06/18/friday-algorithms-iterative-quicksort/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: Iterative Quicksort">Friday Algorithms: Iterative Quicksort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2010/06/11/friday-algorithms-quicksort-difference-between-php-and-javascript/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: Quicksort &#8211; Difference Between PHP and JavaScript">Friday Algorithms: Quicksort &#8211; Difference Between PHP and JavaScript </a></li>
<li><a href="/2010/06/25/friday-algorithms-sorting-a-set-of-integers-far-quicker-than-quicksort/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: Sorting a Set of Integers &#8211; Far Quicker than Quicksort!">Friday Algorithms: Sorting a Set of Integers &#8211; Far Quicker than Quicksort! </a></li>
<li><a href="/2012/03/05/computer-algorithms-merge-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Merge Sort">Computer Algorithms: Merge Sort </a></li>
</ol></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>/2012/03/13/computer-algorithms-quicksort/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Computer Algorithms: Merge Sort</title>
		<link>/2012/03/05/computer-algorithms-merge-sort/</link>
		<comments>/2012/03/05/computer-algorithms-merge-sort/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 20:50:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stoimen]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Adaptive sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Best worst and average case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bubble sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[comparison model sorting algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Divide and conquer algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insertion sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interative solution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interative solutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Merge sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PHP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quicksort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recursive solution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shell sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sorting algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strand sort]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[three algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=2847</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Introduction Basically sorting algorithms can be divided into two main groups. Such based on comparisons and such that are not. I already posted about some of the algorithms of the first group. Insertion sort, bubble sort and Shell sort are based on the comparison model. The problem with these three algorithms is that their complexity &#8230; <a href="/2012/03/05/computer-algorithms-merge-sort/" class="more-link">Continue reading <span class="screen-reader-text">Computer Algorithms: Merge Sort</span> <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a><div class='yarpp-related-rss'>

Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href="/2012/03/13/computer-algorithms-quicksort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Quicksort">Computer Algorithms: Quicksort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2010/07/02/friday-algorithms-javascript-merge-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: JavaScript Merge Sort">Friday Algorithms: JavaScript Merge Sort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2012/02/27/computer-algorithms-shell-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Shell Sort">Computer Algorithms: Shell Sort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2012/03/19/computer-algorithms-radix-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Radix Sort">Computer Algorithms: Radix Sort </a></li>
</ol>
</div>
]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>Basically sorting algorithms can be divided into two main groups. Such based on comparisons and such that are not. I already posted about some of the algorithms of the first group. Insertion sort, bubble sort and Shell sort are based on the comparison model. The problem with these three algorithms is that their complexity is O(n<sup>2</sup>) so they are very slow. </p>
<p>So is it possible to sort a list of items by comparing their items faster than O(n<sup>2</sup>)? The answer is yes and here’s how we can do it.</p>
<p>The nature of those three algorithms mentioned above is that we almost compared each two items from initial list.</p>
<figure id="attachment_2860" style="width: 620px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Principlesofprimitivesortingalgorithms.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Principlesofprimitivesortingalgorithms.png" alt="Insertion sort and bubble sort make too many comparisons, exactly what merge sort tries to overcome!" title="Principles of primitive sorting algorithms" width="620" class="size-full wp-image-2860" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Principlesofprimitivesortingalgorithms.png 640w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Principlesofprimitivesortingalgorithms-300x89.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></a><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Insertion sort and bubble sort make too many comparisons, exactly what merge sort tries to overcome!</figcaption></figure>
<p>This, of course, is not the best approach and we don’t need to do that. Instead we can try to divide the list into smaller lists and then sort them. After sorting the smaller lists, which is supposed to be easier than sorting the entire initial list, we can try to merge the result into one sorted list. This technique is typically known as “divide and conquer”.</p>
<p>Normally if a problem is too difficult to solve, we can try to break it apart into smaller sub-sets of this problem and try to solve them. Then somehow we can merge the results of the solved problems. </p>
<p><figure id="attachment_2856" style="width: 620px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Divideandconquer.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Divideandconquer.png" alt="If it&#039;s too difficult to sort a large list of items, we can break it apart into smaller sub-lists and try to sort them!" title="Divide and conquer" width="620" class="size-full wp-image-2856" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Divideandconquer.png 640w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Divideandconquer-300x188.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></a><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">If it&#039;s too difficult to sort a large list of items, we can break it apart into smaller sub-lists and try to sort them!</figcaption></figure><br />
<span id="more-2847"></span></p>
<h2>Overview</h2>
<p>Merge sort is a comparison model sorting algorithm based on the “divide and conquer” principle. So far so good, so let’s say we have a very large list of data, which we want to sort. Obviously it will be better if we divide the list into two sub-lists with equal length and then sort them. If they remain too large, we can continue breaking them down until we get to something very easy to sort as shown on the diagram bellow.</p>
<figure id="attachment_2859" style="width: 620px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Mergepartinmergesort.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Mergepartinmergesort.png" alt="Merge sort is a typical example of divide and conquer technique!" title="Merge part in merge sort" width="620" class="size-full wp-image-2859" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Mergepartinmergesort.png 624w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Mergepartinmergesort-232x300.png 232w" sizes="(max-width: 624px) 100vw, 624px" /></a><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Merge sort is a typical example of divide and conquer technique!</figcaption></figure>
<p>The thing is that on some step of the algorithm we have two sorted lists and the tricky part is to merge them. However this is not so difficult.<br />
We can start comparing the first items of the lists and than we can pop the smaller of them both and put it into a new list containing the merged (sorted) array.</p>
<h2>Implementation</h2>
<p>The good news is that this algorithm is fast, but not so difficult to implement and that sounds quite good from a developer’s point of view. Here’s the implementation in PHP. Note that every algorithm that follows the divide and conquer principles can be easily implemented in a recursive solution. However recursion can be bitter so you can go for a iterative solution. Typically recursion is &#8220;replaced&#8221; by additional memory space in iterative solutions. Here&#8217;s a recursive version of merge sort.</p>
<pre lang="PHP">
$input = array(6, 5, 3, 1, 8, 7, 2, 4);

function merge_sort($arr)  
{  
	if (count($arr) <= 1) {
		return $arr;  
	}

	$left = array_slice($arr, 0, (int)(count($arr)/2));  
	$right = array_slice($arr, (int)(count($arr)/2));  
	
	$left = merge_sort($left);  
	$right = merge_sort($right);  
	
	$output = merge($left, $right);  

	return $output;  
}  
      
      
function merge($left, $right)  
{  
	$result = array();  

	while (count($left) > 0 && count($right) > 0) {  
		if ($left[0] <= $right[0]) {  
			array_push($result, array_shift($left));  
		} else {  
			array_push($result, array_shift($right));  
		}  
	}  
      
	array_splice($result, count($result), 0, $left);  
	array_splice($result, count($result), 0, $right);  

	return $result;  
}  

// 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
$output = merge_sort($input);
</pre>
<h2>Complexity</h2>
<p>It’s great that the complexity of merge sort is O(n*log(n)) even in the worst case! Note that even quicksort’s complexity can be O(n<sup>2</sup>) in the worst case. So we can be sure that merge sort is very stable no matter the input.</p>
<figure id="attachment_2857" style="width: 620px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortcomplexity.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortcomplexity.png" alt="Merge sort complexity is O(n*log(n))" title="merge sort complexity" width="620" class="size-full wp-image-2857" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortcomplexity.png 640w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortcomplexity-300x185.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></a><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Merge sort complexity is O(n*log(n))</figcaption></figure>
<figure id="attachment_2858" style="width: 481px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/SortingAlgorithmsComplexity.jpg"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/SortingAlgorithmsComplexity.jpg" alt="Merge sort complexity is O(n*log(n)) even in the worst case!" title="Sorting Algorithms Complexity" width="481" height="104" class="size-full wp-image-2858" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/SortingAlgorithmsComplexity.jpg 481w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/SortingAlgorithmsComplexity-300x64.jpg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 481px) 100vw, 481px" /></a><figcaption class="wp-caption-text">Merge sort complexity is O(n*log(n)) even in the worst case!</figcaption></figure>
<h2>Two reasons why merge sort is useful</h2>
<h3>1. Fast no matter the input</h3>
<p>Merge sort is a great sorting algorithm mainly because it’s very fast and stable. It’s complexity is the same even in the worst case and it is O(n*log(n)). Note that even quicksort's complexity is O(n<sup>2</sup>) in the worst case, which for n = 20 is about 4.6 times slower!</p>
<figure id="attachment_2861" style="width: 620px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><a href="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortvs.bubblesortforn20.png"><img src="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortvs.bubblesortforn20.png" alt="Merge sort is about 4.6 times faster than quicksort for n = 20!" title="mergesort vs. bubble sort for n = 20" width="620" class="size-full wp-image-2861" srcset="/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortvs.bubblesortforn20.png 640w, /wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mergesortvs.bubblesortforn20-300x120.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px" /></a><figcaption class="wp-caption-text"> </figcaption></figure>
<h3>2. Easy implementation</h3>
<p>Another cool reason is that merge sort is easy to implement. Indeed most of the developer consider something fast to be difficult to implement, but that's not the case of merge sort.</p>
<h2>Three reasons why merge sort is not useful</h2>
<h3>1. Slower than non-comparison based algorithms</h3>
<p>Merge sort is however based on the comparison model and as such can be slower than algorithms non-based on comparisons that can sort data in linear time. Of course, this depends on the input data, so we must be careful for the input.</p>
<h3>2. Difficult to implement for beginners</h3>
<p>Although I don’t think this can be the main reason why not to use merge sort some people say that it can be difficult to implement for beginners, especially the merge part of the algorithm.</p>
<h3>3. Slower than insertion and bubble sort for nearly sorted input</h3>
<p>Again it is very important to know the input data. Indeed if the input is nearly sorted the insertion sort or bubble sort can be faster. Note that in the best case insertion and bubble sort complexity is O(n), while merge sort's best case is O(n*log(n)).</p>
<p>As a conclusion I can say that merge sort is practically one of the best sorting algorithms because it's easy to implement and fast, so it must be considered by every developer!</p>
<div class='yarpp-related-rss'>
<p>Related posts:<ol>
<li><a href="/2012/03/13/computer-algorithms-quicksort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Quicksort">Computer Algorithms: Quicksort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2010/07/02/friday-algorithms-javascript-merge-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Friday Algorithms: JavaScript Merge Sort">Friday Algorithms: JavaScript Merge Sort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2012/02/27/computer-algorithms-shell-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Shell Sort">Computer Algorithms: Shell Sort </a></li>
<li><a href="/2012/03/19/computer-algorithms-radix-sort/" rel="bookmark" title="Computer Algorithms: Radix Sort">Computer Algorithms: Radix Sort </a></li>
</ol></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>/2012/03/05/computer-algorithms-merge-sort/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
