←back to thread

688 points samwho | 9 comments | | HN request time: 0.434s | source | bottom
1. laurent_du ◴[] No.45017202[source]
Beautiful article but that's not what big O means. The author seems to be describing something that is usually called (upper case) Theta. Big O is an upper bound.
replies(2): >>45017463 #>>45017525 #
2. forrestthewoods ◴[] No.45017463[source]
This “well ackchyually“ is not particularly helpful. You’re not wrong. But this argument was lost 30 years ago. The programming field has been using “Big O” loosely.
replies(1): >>45024157 #
3. samwho ◴[] No.45017525[source]
There's a comment thread further down that disagrees with you.
replies(2): >>45017669 #>>45017981 #
4. umanwizard ◴[] No.45017669[source]
...where?
replies(1): >>45017873 #
5. samwho ◴[] No.45017873{3}[source]
Ah, I conflated worst case with upper bound. My mistake.
replies(1): >>45019214 #
6. laurent_du ◴[] No.45017981[source]
I am not interested in arguing so I'll just repeat that your article is beautiful and even though it's not entirely correct I think it has value and I appreciate the time you spent working on this and putting it out to help others.
replies(1): >>45018489 #
7. samwho ◴[] No.45018489{3}[source]
Thank you, I appreciate that a lot.
8. ◴[] No.45019214{4}[source]
9. windward ◴[] No.45024157[source]
I've had conversations at work where the difference was important. Mass adoption of quicksort implies I'm not the only one.