Re: [code-review] Tie::Array::Sorted

Tony Bowden:
> This implies there's probably some cut off point where if the user is
> pushing more than X items on to the list at once, it's going to be
> faster (potentially significantly faster) to just delegate it off to the
> builtin sort, rather than repeatedly running your own binary search. 
> 
> I have no idea how to calculate that number however.

It's conceivable that the cut-off is when the number of items added 
is >= the number of items already in the list. Someone else suggested it might
be more efficient in some cases to sort the list on access rather than on
store.

> I also don't really think it's worth doing for the module - just
> throwing it out as a random observation ...

*nod*. There's no way to be both general purpose and maximally efficient, so
I'm going to allow myself not to care. :)

-- 
It is now pitch dark.  If you proceed, you will likely fall into a pit.