comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive

Home » Public Forums » archive » Re: IDL sorting

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: IDL sorting [message #56359 is a reply to message #56353]

Thu, 18 October 2007 05:20

Wox
Messages: 184
Registered: August 2006

Senior Member

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:38:12 -0600, David Fanning <news@dfanning.com>
wrote:

> I'm not sure it's more elegant, but the NASA BSORT
> routine certainly takes a lot of the work out of it. :-)

It does the same I suscribed: resorting each subarray of equal values
by its original subscript. I was hoping that there would be a better
solution.

If I had to sort 32-bit longs, I could e.g. make 64-bit longs with HO
DWORD equal to the value and the LO DWORD equal to the subscript.
Sorting the resulting 64-bit longs would do the trick, wouldn't it?

function sort,array
array64=ishft(long64(array),32)+lindgen(n_elements(array))
return,sort(array64)
end

However, I want to sort 64-bit values. Maybe there is another way, so
that sort will do the right thing. Btw, I didn't want to ask this, but
why is IDL's sort doing this? Is there any situation where mixing up
the order of equal values has a benefit?

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		Re: IDL sorting By: Karl Schultz on Thu, 18 October 2007 14:58
		Re: IDL sorting By: wlandsman on Thu, 18 October 2007 13:43
		Re: IDL sorting By: Karl Schultz on Thu, 18 October 2007 11:30
		Re: IDL sorting By: wlandsman on Thu, 18 October 2007 08:50
		Re: IDL sorting By: Wox on Thu, 18 October 2007 05:20
		Re: IDL sorting By: Loren Anderson on Wed, 17 October 2007 14:15
		Re: IDL sorting By: David Fanning on Wed, 17 October 2007 08:38
		Re: IDL sorting By: Loren Anderson on Wed, 17 October 2007 08:37
		Re: IDL sorting By: JD Smith on Thu, 01 November 2007 17:02

Previous Topic:	read_tiff only looks in current working directory?
Next Topic:	ADF format in IDL

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Wed Oct 08 19:25:14 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00436 seconds