Re: table.sort: invalid order function for sorting

If you want stability, suitable for mitlkey sort, or sorts in multiple
passes, and the minimum of swaps for duplicate values, or for NaN values),
using the comparator (a<b) does not work at all, but (a<=b) does.

Lua made the worst decision for its binary comparator used in table.sort!

As a conséquence you always need to rewrite it.

Le ven. 24 avr. 2026, 21:19, 'Martin Eden' via lua-l <[email protected]>
a écrit :

> On 2026-04-24 21:13, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:
> >> [...] Have you ever met the case when you need to code effective
> >> sorting in practice?
> > I really don't think this information is relevant to this list. Let us
> > avoid allowing arguments to get too personal. Thanks.
> >
> > -- Roberto
>
> I agree here. Let's consider it as rhetorical question.
>
> But I still want to discuss three-way vs two-way partitioning.
> Current Lua uses two-way as a given fact. I want to evaluate
> alternatives.
>
> -- Martin
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "lua-l" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lua-l/9f0e3d7f-574f-4825-bb0c-642823cf60d0%40disroot.org
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lua-l" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lua-l/CAGa7JC0DZUOMFTr1a0WVa24itOtws9zTgtRGq-0ULe%2BqMYtRrw%40mail.gmail.com.