JortSort: Difference between revisions
Rename Perl 6 -> Raku, alphabetize, minor clean-up
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) (Rename Perl 6 -> Raku, alphabetize, minor clean-up) |
|||
Line 248:
}
</lang>
=={{header|C sharp|C#}}==▼
{{trans|JavaScript}}▼
<lang csharp>using System;▼
class Program▼
{▼
public static bool JortSort<T>(T[] array) where T : IComparable, IEquatable<T>▼
{▼
// sort the array▼
T[] originalArray = (T[]) array.Clone();▼
Array.Sort(array);▼
// compare to see if it was originally sorted▼
for (var i = 0; i < originalArray.Length; i++)▼
{▼
if (!Equals(originalArray[i], array[i]))▼
{▼
return false;▼
}▼
}▼
return true;▼
}▼
}</lang>▼
=={{header|C++}}==
Line 322 ⟶ 347:
2 1 3 4 5 : -> The array is not sorted!
</pre>
▲=={{header|C sharp|C#}}==
▲{{trans|JavaScript}}
▲<lang csharp>using System;
▲class Program
▲{
▲ public static bool JortSort<T>(T[] array) where T : IComparable, IEquatable<T>
▲ {
▲ // sort the array
▲ T[] originalArray = (T[]) array.Clone();
▲ Array.Sort(array);
▲ // compare to see if it was originally sorted
▲ for (var i = 0; i < originalArray.Length; i++)
▲ {
▲ if (!Equals(originalArray[i], array[i]))
▲ {
▲ return false;
▲ }
▲ }
▲ return true;
▲ }
▲}</lang>
=={{header|Clojure}}==
Line 691:
true
true</pre>
=={{header|Mathematica}}==
Line 763 ⟶ 762:
The task wants us to sort, but we could implement this by just using <tt>cmp</tt> on the input array elements, which would be faster (especially with unsorted input).
=={{header|Perl 6}}==▼
<lang perl6>sub jort-sort { @_ eqv @_.sort }</lang>▼
Actually, there's a better internal sort that seems to work best for lists that are already completely sorted, but tends to fails for any other list. The name of this sort, <tt>[!after]</tt>, is completely opaque, so we're pretty much forced to hide it inside a subroutine to prevent widespread panic.▼
<lang perl6>sub jort-sort-more-better-sorta { [!after] @_ }</lang>▼
However, since Perl 6 has a really good inliner, there's really little point anyway in using the <tt>[!after]</tt> reduction operator directly, and <tt>jort-sort-more-better-sorta</tt> is really much more self-documenting, so please don't use the reduction operator if you can. For example:▼
{{out}}▼
<pre>$ perl6▼
> [!after] <a b c> # DON'T do it this way▼
True▼
> [!after] 1,3,2 # DON'T do it this way either▼
False</pre>▼
Please do your part to uphold and/or downhold our community standards.▼
=={{header|Phix}}==
<lang Phix>type JortSort(sequence s)
Line 872 ⟶ 859:
(for/and ([x (in-list l)] [y (in-list (cdr l))])
(not (<? y x))))) ; same as (<= x y) but using only <?</lang>
(formerly Perl 6)
▲<lang perl6>sub jort-sort { @_ eqv @_.sort }</lang>
▲Actually, there's a better internal sort that seems to work best for lists that are already completely sorted, but tends to fails for any other list. The name of this sort, <tt>[!after]</tt>, is completely opaque, so we're pretty much forced to hide it inside a subroutine to prevent widespread panic.
▲<lang perl6>sub jort-sort-more-better-sorta { [!after] @_ }</lang>
▲However, since Perl 6 has a really good inliner, there's really little point anyway in using the <tt>[!after]</tt> reduction operator directly, and <tt>jort-sort-more-better-sorta</tt> is really much more self-documenting, so please don't use the reduction operator if you can. For example:
▲{{out}}
▲<pre>$ perl6
▲> [!after] <a b c> # DON'T do it this way
▲True
▲> [!after] 1,3,2 # DON'T do it this way either
▲False</pre>
▲Please do your part to uphold and/or downhold our community standards.
=={{header|REXX}}==
| |||