Go rant

[Don]

dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Don (nospam at nospam.com)'s article
>> "the bubble sort seems to have nothing to recommend it, except a catchy
>> name " - Knuth.
> 
> Well, the bubble sort distance is a pretty good metric of how similarly ordered
> two lists are.  It's useful, for example, in statistics such as Kendall's Tau.
> One of the easiest ways to calculate it is...with a bubble sort.

I don't think that's a coincidence. It seems to be defined in terms of 
bubble sort!

The whole bubble sort phenonemon seems to be self-perpetuating. There 
were loads of really crap algorithms in the 1950's. Why was this one not 
forgotten with the rest?