Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 05:07:38PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
quoted
René Scharfe [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Use prio_queue to improve worst-case performance at the cost of slightly
worse best-case performance. Then add and use prio_queue_replace() to
recover that loss.
Would change in the tiebreaking behaviour (aka sort stability) also
a cost of this change, as this swaps use of sorted linearly linked
list with priority queue?
The prio_queue uses insertion order as a tie-breaker for stability (with
earlier entries coming first). For building the initial queue from the
list, I think that is obviously fine (we feed them in sorted order,
which the prio queue will retain).
OK, then everything looks great. Thanks.