-
-
Save wilkerlucio/db54dc83a9664124f3febf6356f04509 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
(ns util.natural-sorting | |
(:refer-clojure :exclude [sort sort-by]) | |
(:require [clojure.string])) | |
(defn parse-int [s] | |
#?(:clj (Long/parseLong s) | |
:cljs (js/parseInt s))) | |
(defn vector-compare [[value1 & rest1] [value2 & rest2]] | |
(let [result (compare value1 value2)] | |
(cond | |
(not (zero? result)) result | |
(nil? value1) 0 | |
:else (recur rest1 rest2)))) | |
(defn prepare-string [s] | |
(let [s (or s "") | |
parts (vec (clojure.string/split s #"\d+")) | |
numbers (->> (re-seq #"\d+" s) | |
(map parse-int) | |
(vec))] | |
(vec (interleave (conj parts "") (conj numbers -1))))) | |
(defn natural-compare [a b] | |
(vector-compare (prepare-string a) | |
(prepare-string b))) | |
(defn sort [coll] (clojure.core/sort natural-compare coll)) | |
(defn sort-by [keyfn coll] | |
(clojure.core/sort-by keyfn natural-compare coll)) |
I am indeed curious enough to profile it myself and also publish some generative tests I have already written for it in my own code. Just don't have enough time at the moment. Will probably get to it some time next week.
I did some benchmarking (rudimentary) and updated my library to version 0.0.10. Short story is the "lazy" version does outperform implementations based on splitting and parsing, but only for long (for some definition of long) strings, which I think are more rare. At least in situations where I use and where I imagine having a need to use natural sorting, I think they would be rare. Same goes for overflow, it's not a situation I am concerned with. Maybe my situation is an outlier, but so far I've had more control over the types of strings I'm needing to sort.
In this version 0.0.10 of my library I included implementations and tests for my original parse version (which remains the default), my lazy version, a bigint-based version (suggested by Lee), Wilker's original, and Eugene's version. I hope that is okay, I think I have explicit okay from everyone except Eugene but I'm guessing he is okay with including his version.
Sure, I don't mind.
Ha! That's awesome @wevre! I've no real interest in performance at this point, but maybe @p-himik has an interest?