1 files changed, 67 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/comparison/Inpla/src/msort-800000-reuse.in b/comparison/Inpla/src/msort-800000-reuse.in
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..36723b9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/comparison/Inpla/src/msort-800000-reuse.in
@@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
+// Merge sort
+MS(ret) >< [] => ret~[];
+MS(ret) >< x:xs => MS_tail(ret, x)~xs;
+
+MS_tail(ret, n) >< [] => ret~(*R)[n];
+MS_tail(ret, int n) >< x:xs => 
+//	MS(a)~left, MS(b)~right, Append(ret,a)~b,
+//	Split(0, left,right) ~ (n:x:xs);
+	MS(a)~left, MS(b)~right, Append(ret,a)~b,
+	(*L)Split(left,right) ~ (*R)(n:x:xs);
+
+
+/*
+Splitn(int flag, a, b) >< [] => a~[], b~[];
+Splitn(int flag, a, b) >< (int y):ys
+| flag==0 => b~(*R)(y:cnt), (*L)Splitn(1, a, cnt)~ys
+| _       => a~(*R)(y:cnt), (*L)Splitn(0, cnt, b)~ys;
+
+Split(a,b) >< x:xs => Splitn(0,a,b)~x:xs;
+*/
+
+Split(a,b) >< [] => a~[], b~[];
+Split(a,b) >< x:xs => a~(x:cntl), (*L)Split(b,cntl)~xs;
+
+
+
+// この実験から、Merge は悪くないことがわかる。
+// Part でも -t 5 6 7 順に速くなる。
+// つまり、Split が悪いと言える。
+
+/*
+MS_tail(ret, n) >< [] => ret~(*R)[n];
+MS_tail(ret, n) >< x:xs => 
+	MS(a)~left, MS(b)~right, Merge(ret,b)~a,
+	(*L)Split(left,right) ~ (*R)(n:x:xs);
+*/
+
+Merge(ret, snd) >< [] => ret~snd;
+Merge(ret, snd) >< x:xs => (*L)MergeCC(ret, x, xs)~snd;
+
+MergeCC(ret, int y, ys) >< [] => ret~(*R)(y:ys);
+MergeCC(ret, int y, ys) >< (int x):xs
+| x <= y => ret~(x:cnt), (*L)MergeCC(cnt, y, ys) ~ xs
+| _      => ret~(y:cnt), (*L)MergeCC(cnt, x, xs) ~ ys;
+// ret~(*R)(x:cnt) less improvement
+
+// *** I should make an option that outputs bytecodes to a file. ***
+// *** Then, I have to look the reason why 
+// *** ret~(*R)(x:cnt), MergeCC(cnt, y, ys) ~ xs becomes less improvement.
+
+
+
+
+//	left~cntr, (*L)Split(cntr,cntl)~xs, right~(x:cntl);
+// This also make it less efficient.
+
+
+const LIST_ELEM=1200000;
+
+MkRandList(ret) >< (int n)
+| n>0 => ret~(rd:cnt), (*L)MkRandList(cnt)~(n-1) 
+  where rd=rand(LIST_ELEM)
+| _ => ret~[];
+
+MkRandList(cnt)~(LIST_ELEM),
+MS(ret)~cnt;
+ret;