C qsort() vs C++ sort()
Last Updated :
14 Aug, 2018
Standard C library provides qsort function that can be used for sorting an array. Following is the prototype of qsort() function.
// Sort an array of any type. The parameters are, base
// address of array, size of array and pointer to
// comparator function
void qsort (void* base, size_t num, size_t size,
int (*comparator)(const void*, const void*));
It requires a pointer to the array, the number of elements in the array, the size of each element and a comparator function. We have discussed qsort comparator in detail here.
C++ Standard Library provides a similar function sort() that originated in the STL. We have discussed C++ sort here. Following are prototypes of C++ sort() function.
// To sort in default or ascending order.
template
void sort(T first, T last);
// To sort according to the order specified
// by comp.
template
void sort(T first, T last, Compare comp);
The order of equal elements is not guaranteed to be preserved. C++ provides std::stable_sort that can be used to preserve order.
Comparison to qsort and sort()
1. Implementation details:
As the name suggests, qsort function uses QuickSort algorithm to sort the given array, although the C standard does not require it to implement quicksort.
C++ sort function uses introsort which is a hybrid algorithm. Different implementations use different algorithms. The GNU Standard C++ library, for example, uses a 3-part hybrid sorting algorithm: introsort is performed first (introsort itself being a hybrid of quicksort and heap sort) followed by an insertion sort on the result.
2. Complexity :
The C standard doesn’t talk about its complexity of qsort. The new C++11 standard requires that the complexity of sort to be O(Nlog(N)) in the worst case. Previous versions of C++ such as C++03 allow possible worst case scenario of O(N^2). Only average complexity was required to be O(N log N).
3. Running time:
STL’s sort ran faster than C’s qsort, because C++’s templates generate optimized code for a particular data type and a particular comparison function.
STL’s sort runs 20% to 50% faster than the hand-coded quicksort and 250% to 1000% faster than the C qsort library function. C might be the fastest language but qsort is very slow.
When we tried to sort one million integers on C++14, Time taken by C qsort() was 0.247883 sec and time taken by C++ sort() was only 0.086125 sec
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
#define N 1000000
int compare( const void * a, const void * b)
{
return ( *( int *)a - *( int *)b );
}
int main()
{
int arr[N], dupArr[N];
srand ( time (NULL));
clock_t begin, end;
double time_spent;
for ( int i = 0; i < N; i++)
dupArr[i] = arr[i] = rand ()%100000;
begin = clock ();
qsort (arr, N, sizeof ( int ), compare);
end = clock ();
time_spent = ( double )(end - begin) / CLOCKS_PER_SEC;
cout << "Time taken by C qsort() - "
<< time_spent << endl;
time_spent = 0.0;
begin = clock ();
sort(dupArr, dupArr + N);
end = clock ();
time_spent = ( double )(end - begin) / CLOCKS_PER_SEC;
cout << "Time taken by C++ sort() - "
<< time_spent << endl;
return 0;
}
|
Output :
Time taken by C qsort() - 0.247883
Time taken by C++ sort() - 0.086125
C++ sort() is blazingly faster than qsort() on equivalent data due to inlining. sort() on a container of integers will be compiled to use std::less::operator() by default, which will be inlined and sort() will be comparing the integers directly. On the other hand, qsort() will be making an indirect call through a function pointer for every comparison which compilers fails to optimize.
4. Flexibility:
STL’s sort works for all data types and for different data containers like C arrays, C++ vectors, C++ deques, etc and other containers that can be written by the user. This kind of flexibility is rather difficult to achieve in C.
5. Safety:
Compared to qsort, the templated sort is more type-safe since it does not require access to data items through unsafe void pointers, as qsort does.
References:
http://theory.stanford.edu/~amitp/rants/c++-vs-c
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sort_(C%2B%2B)
Share your thoughts in the comments
Please Login to comment...