<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Dec 31, 2015, at 12:20, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">2. It forces a naïve implementation, which may not be the best idea. In the Perl world, for instance, we would usually use a Schwartzian transform to implement this, particularly if the key might be expensive to compute:</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: pre; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"> </span><span style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;" class="">array.map { ($0, sortKey($0)) }.sort { $0.1 < $1.1 }.map { $0.0 }</span><br style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">+1 <i class="">and</i> -1 to this. Computing the sort key N times instead of 2*(# of comparisons) can be a big win sometimes. On the other hand, allocating <i class="">memory</i> for the sort keys might be a net loss, especially if the collection being sorted is large. I guess that means it's better to be made explicit, but it would be nice™ if it were more convenient than it is now. Brent's way does a lot of copies; I tried to avoid that but quickly ran into trouble…</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;" class=""><div class="">var keys = array.map { $0.key }</div><div class="">array.sort { ??? }</div></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div>…because the current 'sort' takes a comparator, which just takes values, not indices.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Jordan</div></body></html>