Remove custom SkSort algorithms.
SortBench shows that SkTQSort and SkTHeapSort are inferior to std::sort.
The difference is small on randomized inputs, but quite significant for
semi-ordered inputs (forward/backward/repeated). There doesn't seem to
to be any compelling advantage to SkTQSort.
Nanobench results: https://screenshot.googleplex.com/9JOLV1d6Z0u
(These performance numbers are from an optimized build my local machine;
it's possible that we might see different results on the test bots.)
Change-Id: Iaf19563041547eae7de2953be249129108f093b1
Reviewed-on: https://skia-review.googlesource.com/c/skia/+/302295
Commit-Queue: John Stiles <johnstiles@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Mike Klein <mtklein@google.com>
diff --git a/tests/PathOpsTestCommon.cpp b/tests/PathOpsTestCommon.cpp
index a8106d0..ef75aab 100644
--- a/tests/PathOpsTestCommon.cpp
+++ b/tests/PathOpsTestCommon.cpp
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@
* found in the LICENSE file.
*/
#include "src/core/SkPathPriv.h"
-#include "src/core/SkTSort.h"
#include "src/pathops/SkPathOpsBounds.h"
#include "src/pathops/SkPathOpsConic.h"
#include "src/pathops/SkPathOpsCubic.h"
@@ -77,7 +76,7 @@
inflections += cubic->findMaxCurvature(&inflectT[inflections]);
SkASSERT(inflections <= 5);
}
- SkTQSort<double>(inflectT, &inflectT[inflections - 1]);
+ std::sort(inflectT, inflectT + inflections);
// OPTIMIZATION: is this filtering common enough that it needs to be pulled out into its
// own subroutine?
while (inflections && approximately_less_than_zero(inflectT[0])) {