How about using the array_multisort() instead of usort():
array_multisort(
$list,
array_column($list,'a'),
array_column($list, 'b')
);
Running on a mac book pro, 2.2GHz Intel Core i7, 16GB, listing Av. of 3 runs:
Associative array (Sorting)
| Method | Runtime (s) | Memory (bytes) |
|---|---|---|
| usort | 15.6589 (s) | 541414232 bytes (516.33 MB) |
| array_mulitsort | 8.8314 (s) | 706785816 bytes (674.04 MB) |
Object with public properties (sorting):
| Method | Runtime (s) | Memory (bytes) |
|---|---|---|
| usort | 12.9263 (s) | 253795352 bytes (242.04 MB) |
| array_mulitsort | 7.6217 (s) | 419166808 bytes (399.75MB) |
a tradeoff between memory and runtime ...
Interesting observation! If you're sorting an array, yes, that would make a big difference. However, the purpose of
usort()here was to provide a direct comparison between objects and arrays, so they had to be used in the same way. That meantusort()so that we could compare the property access in each. I didn't as much care about the sorting itself as sorting was an easy way to call$array['a']and$object->aa few zillion times. :-)Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit