• Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= (15/15) Jun 13 2022 Is there a dynamic chain primitive, so that you can add to the
• Salih Dincer (20/22) Jun 13 2022 Already so:
• Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= (6/12) Jun 13 2022 I meant something like: chain = [arr1, arr2, …, arrN]
• Steven Schveighoffer (8/27) Jun 13 2022 `chain` allows ranges of different types.
• Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= (7/9) Jun 13 2022 Yes, I got the error «must satisfy the following constraint:
• Steven Schveighoffer (5/16) Jun 13 2022 Merge sort only works if it's easy to manipulate the structure, like a
• Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= (5/8) Jun 13 2022 The easiest option is to have two buffers that can hold all

Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= <ola.fosheim.grostad gmail.com> writes:

Is there a dynamic chain primitive, so that you can add to the 
chain at runtime?

Context: the following example on the front page is interesting.

```d
void main()
{
     int[] arr1 = [4, 9, 7];
     int[] arr2 = [5, 2, 1, 10];
     int[] arr3 = [6, 8, 3];
     sort(chain(arr1, arr2, arr3));
     writefln("%s\n%s\n%s\n", arr1, arr2, arr3);
}
```

But it would be much more useful in practice if "chain" was a 
dynamic array.

Salih Dincer <salihdb hotmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 13 June 2022 at 08:51:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
 But it would be much more useful in practice if "chain" was a 
 dynamic array.

Already so:

```d
int[] arr = [4, 9, 7, 5, 2, 1, 10, 6, 8, 3];

int[] arr1 = arr[0..3];
int[] arr2 = arr[3..7];
int[] arr3 = arr[7..$];

sort(chain(arr1, arr2, arr3));
writefln("%s\n%s\n%s\n", arr1, arr2, arr3);
typeid(arr).writeln(": ", arr);
writeln(&arr[0], " == ", &arr1[0]);

/* Print Out:
[1, 2, 3]
[4, 5, 6, 7]
[8, 9, 10]

int[]: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
7F7FBE348000 == 7F7FBE348000
*/
```

Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= <ola.fosheim.grostad gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 13 June 2022 at 09:08:40 UTC, Salih Dincer wrote:
 On Monday, 13 June 2022 at 08:51:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
 wrote:
 But it would be much more useful in practice if "chain" was a 
 dynamic array.

 Already so:

I meant something like: chain = [arr1, arr2, …, arrN]

I don't use ranges, but I thought this specific use case could be 
valuable.

Imagine you have a chunked datastructure of unknown lengths, and 
you want to "redistribute" items without reallocation.

Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy gmail.com> writes:

On 6/13/22 4:51 AM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
 Is there a dynamic chain primitive, so that you can add to the chain at 
 runtime?
 
 Context: the following example on the front page is interesting.
 
 ```d
 void main()
 {
      int[] arr1 = [4, 9, 7];
      int[] arr2 = [5, 2, 1, 10];
      int[] arr3 = [6, 8, 3];
      sort(chain(arr1, arr2, arr3));
      writefln("%s\n%s\n%s\n", arr1, arr2, arr3);
 }
 ```
 
 But it would be much more useful in practice if "chain" was a dynamic 
 array.
 

`chain` allows ranges of different types.
`joiner` should be the equivalent for a dynamic range of ranges of the 
same type.

I would think sort(joiner([arr1, arr2, arr3])) should work, but it's not 
a random access range. Most likely because the big-O constants are no 
longer constant.

-Steve

Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= <ola.fosheim.grostad gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 13 June 2022 at 13:22:52 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
 I would think sort(joiner([arr1, arr2, arr3])) should work, but 
 it's not a random access range.

Yes, I got the error «must satisfy the following constraint: 
isRandomAccessRange!Range`».

It would be relatively easy to make it work as a random access 
range if arr1, arr2, etc were fixed size slices.

Or I guess, use insertion-sort followed by merge-sort.

Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy gmail.com> writes:

On 6/13/22 9:44 AM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
 On Monday, 13 June 2022 at 13:22:52 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
 I would think sort(joiner([arr1, arr2, arr3])) should work, but it's 
 not a random access range.

 
 Yes, I got the error «must satisfy the following constraint: 
 isRandomAccessRange!Range`».
 
 It would be relatively easy to make it work as a random access range if 
 arr1, arr2, etc were fixed size slices.
 
 Or I guess, use insertion-sort followed by merge-sort.

Merge sort only works if it's easy to manipulate the structure, like a 
linked-list, or to build a new structure, like if you don't care about 
allocating a new array every iteration.

-Steve

Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= <ola.fosheim.grostad gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 13 June 2022 at 14:03:13 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
 Merge sort only works if it's easy to manipulate the structure, 
 like a linked-list, or to build a new structure, like if you 
 don't care about allocating a new array every iteration.

The easiest option is to have two buffers that can hold all 
items, in the last merge you merge back to the input-storage. But 
yeah, it is only «fast» for very large arrays.