feat: add binary insertion sort algorithm

[syedjafer]

No description provided.

[raklaptudirm]

We already have a binary search implementation, so use that instead of making your own.

[syedjafer]

Hi @raklaptudirm, the existing binary search will return -1 if we don't find the element. But my modified version find the position of the element that is to be inserted in the array. So I cant reuse it.

[raklaptudirm]

Ah, makes sense.

[syedjafer]

@appgurueu Can you please review this PR

[appgurueu]

Hi @raklaptudirm, the existing binary search will return -1 if we don't find the element. But my modified version find the position of the element that is to be inserted in the array. So I cant reuse it.

You could consider updating the existing binary search.

[syedjafer]

@appgurueu See the actuall Binary Search should return -1 if the key is not found. But in my function, I will be returning the insertion position of the key element.

[appgurueu]

@appgurueu See the actuall Binary Search should return -1 if the key is not found.

No. Our current implementation behaves this way because it is lazily written. More advanced implementations return the insertion or occurrence index; it is then trivial to check whether the element was found (arr[idx] === element).

[syedjafer]

@appgurueu yeah, correct.

How to proceed mate ? Do i need to close this PR and create a new one for Binary Search or Include the fix for binary search in this PR itself. ?

[appgurueu]

@appgurueu yeah, correct.

How to proceed mate ? Do i need to close this PR and create a new one for Binary Search or Include the fix for binary search in this PR itself. ?

I'd be fine with including the extension/feature (not a fix, the current implementation is correct) in this PR.

[syedjafer]

@appgurueu I have created a PR for Binary Search Improvement
#72

[zFl4wless]

@appgurueu What about this PR? I think this can be closed

[appgurueu]

@appgurueu What about this PR? I think this can be closed

It can be closed, yes, but why should it be closed? It would add something if it were merged. It's just that it currently depends on #72. The author should be able pick this up at any time.

[zFl4wless]

An sorry, I understood this wrongly. I thought this PR was canceled

[appgurueu]

The binary search is still duplicated locally.