⚠️ Warning: This is a draft ⚠️
This means it might contain formatting issues, incorrect code, conceptual problems, or other severe issues.
If you want to help to improve and eventually enable this page, please fork RosettaGit's repository and open a merge request on GitHub.
== Designing for failure? ==
Sleep gives a minimum duration to sleep, but not a maximum. This algorithm would thus sort incorrectly on a heavily loaded system. I cannot see a way to design a way around this without cheating on the algorithm. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 15:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC) :This is kinda just for fun. I wouldn't worry too much about it. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 15:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Why the requirement that the integers be non-negative?
Does this mean the programs should check if any integers are non-negative?
What if the program can handle negative integers?
Negative numbers aren't that much of a strange animal to be sorted, and I can't see that any programmer will strain their back coding for such beasts. The little I know of most programmers, weak of back, strong of mind. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 19:02, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
: This task not only specifies the end result -- that the numbers be sorted -- but the procedure for accomplishing that. Specifying the procedure is, as a general rule, bad practice, since the implementations are almost invariably inferior to what you get when you simply specify the desired results and consequences. Mis-specifying is done here on rosettacode, sometimes, I think for the humor value. Here, for example, a negative integer would require a negative delay -- the code would have to finish waiting before it started waiting. --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] 21:08, 2 June 2012 (UTC)