惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

C
Check Point Blog
罗磊的独立博客
量子位
Microsoft Azure Blog
Microsoft Azure Blog
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
钛媒体:引领未来商业与生活新知
J
Java Code Geeks
M
MIT News - Artificial intelligence
月光博客
月光博客
IT之家
IT之家
D
DataBreaches.Net
A
About on SuperTechFans
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Cyber Security Advisories - MS-ISAC
Last Week in AI
Last Week in AI
D
Docker
The GitHub Blog
The GitHub Blog
B
Blog
V
Visual Studio Blog
博客园 - Franky
N
Netflix TechBlog - Medium
博客园 - 【当耐特】
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler
博客园 - 聂微东
U
Unit 42

The Old New Thing

Why do Microsoft job levels start in the high 50's instead of starting at a sane number like 1? - The Old New Thing Why didn't Read­Directory­ChangesW provide a way to correlate the two sides of a rename operation? - The Old New Thing How can I remove the Close button from my window caption? - The Old New Thing Why is the x86 undefined instruction called ud2? Why 2? - The Old New Thing What algorithm did Windows XP use to choose your initial user picture? - The Old New Thing A sample use of the winstart.bat file in Windows 95 - The Old New Thing Why don't we allow stacks to be sparse, instead of forcing them to be contiguous? - The Old New Thing What happens if you change a window class's GCL_CB­WND­EXTRA? - The Old New Thing The case of the progress callback that never got called when progress happened - The Old New Thing The perils of binding to value types in XAML - The Old New Thing Microspeak: Funded / unfunded - The Old New Thing AWE does not require PAE, though PAE makes it much more useful - The Old New Thing On forcing all derived classes to implement a specific non-virtual method, part 2 - The Old New Thing On forcing all derived classes to implement a specific non-virtual method, part 1 - The Old New Thing In the product end game, every change carries significant risk, episode 2 - The Old New Thing Why didn't the Windows Entertainment Pack just run the MS-DOS version inside an emulator? - The Old New Thing Comparing the two holograms on the Windows 95 box - The Old New Thing Reducing C++ template bloat by factoring out the type-dependent portions of the function, practical exam - The Old New Thing Reducing C++ template bloat by factoring out the type-dependent portions of the function - The Old New Thing On wrapping a callable in a lambda that just calls it with the same parameters - The Old New Thing Why did the Microsoft Entertainment Pack for Windows have a special sticker announcing that it also had Tetris? - The Old New Thing How do functions like alloca allocate memory from the stack? - The Old New Thing How do functions like alloca allocate memory from the stack? - The Old New Thing Forcing an ARM64X executable to run as a specific architecture - The Old New Thing A little helper class for managing LPPROC_THREAD_ATTRIBUTE_LISTs - The Old New Thing The comments that go into code versus those that go into the pull request description - The Old New Thing The little-known winstart.bat batch file - The Old New Thing How can I perform a Copy­File&shy in unbuffered mode? - The Old New Thing Creating a fake agile wrapper that is technically agile but is not useful outside its home apartment, part 5 - The Old New Thing Creating a fake agile wrapper that is technically agile but is not useful outside its home apartment, part 4 - The Old New Thing
Rotation revisited: A shocking discovery about gcc’s unid...
Raymond Chen · 2026-06-03 · via The Old New Thing

Last time, we looked at the rotation algorithm used by gcc libstdc++ for random-access iterators, and I concluded by noting that we’re going to make a shocking discovery.

As with all shocking discoveries, this one will shock disappoint you.

The discovery is that the gcc libstdc++ algorithm is the same as the forward-iterator algorithm!

Let’s run both algorithms on a problem where the two blocks are A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, B4, B5. I’ll put the old forward iterator algorithm on top and the new gcc libstdc++ algorithm below.

first   mid       last
           
A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5
           
first   mid       last

We swap at first and mid, then advance both pointers. The two algorithms agree until first reaches the end of the original A block.

      first   mid   last
           
B1 B2 B3 A1 A2 A3 B4 B5
           
      first   mid   last

The old algorithm recurses in order to exchange A1, A2, A3 with B4, B4. This happens by exchanging A1 with B4 and A2 with B5.

The new algorithm just keeps swapping first with mid, which also exchanges A1 with B4 and A2 with B5.

          first   mid
last
             
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 A3 A1 A2
             
          first   last
mid

The old algorithm now recurses to swap the A3 block with the A1+A2 block. And that’s what the new algorithm does, too.

So it’s the same algorithm, just with a different point of view. It’s another case of the geeky thrill of discovering that two things are really the same thing, just with different labels.

Now, the two algorithms are not identical. The new algorithm is symmetric and performs its swaps from right to left if the larger block is on the right. The old algorithm always operates from left to right.

But the similarity is striking.

Next time, we’ll look at how clang performs rotation by decomposing into cycles.

Category

Topics

Author

Raymond Chen

Raymond has been involved in the evolution of Windows for more than 30 years. In 2003, he began a Web site known as The Old New Thing which has grown in popularity far beyond his wildest imagination, a development which still gives him the heebie-jeebies. The Web site spawned a book, coincidentally also titled The Old New Thing (Addison Wesley 2007). He occasionally appears on the Windows Dev Docs Twitter account to tell stories which convey no useful information.