Talk:Bitonic sorter
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
C Implementation Incomplete
editThe C implementation is missing some crucial portions of the implementations (bitonic merge / sort / swapwith) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.174.66 (talk) 06:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Why?
editThe current article doesn't go into the advantages of this sort. Why would you use it?
Java implementation broken!
editThe java implementation given throws an array out of bounds exception when run on input of size != 2^k ! Just thought i'd let you know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:CB04:62:1400:74F3:3C8:DFC5:1117 (talk) 03:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
I noticed that. I didn't test either algorithm, but by inspection you can see that they only work on inputs of size 2^k. Both algorithms use len/2 for the length of each half at every iteration. When the total length is odd, that can't be. Is it the case that bitonic sort only works on 2^k arrays? If so, the article definitely should say so. If not, the algorithms need to be fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3398:DD10:7DAF:AB09:6F9A:588D (talk) 12:07, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
The current C-style pseudocode behaves the same. - Glibg10b (talk) 06:44, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
What is O(log^2 (n)) usually either log sub 2 (n) or log (n^2)?
editThe top description has an odd big-O notation. Also, if its point is parallelism, it is traditional to use O(n, p) with p being processors. What am I missing? Charles Merriam (talk) 02:14, 22 May 2024 (UTC)