@turnerniles might be good to double check this in the UI. it will technically slow things down a bit on the initial pivot instantiation because it now sorts the data set (O(nlogn) operation vs O(n)). The alternative was to keep track of the order but it would have been quite a bit more complicated and may not have been any more efficient.
Coverage increased (+0.02%) to 98.649% when pulling fc1ef823a432cd19a57e9b6f91e06288b39dd010 on 55orderChangePostFilter into 29753bc87d1691424459cc9a023dda5eea821fd4 on master.
Coverage increased (+0.02%) to 98.649% when pulling 30a09d38ddeb8d072a0b80925a4d8264d9e977be on 55orderChangePostFilter into 29753bc87d1691424459cc9a023dda5eea821fd4 on master.
Coverage increased (+0.02%) to 98.649% when pulling 7a01d8eb882ae81d6601e72f59bf9c3eb0d06437 on 55orderChangePostFilter into 29753bc87d1691424459cc9a023dda5eea821fd4 on master.
Coverage increased (+0.02%) to 98.649% when pulling 625f6c0a0e82053257da8a2e28093bc0ce42786e on 55orderChangePostFilter into 6b32acc26879dd48ba09cf2cb2b2f94bcb5a3aec on master.
closes #55
@turnerniles might be good to double check this in the UI. it will technically slow things down a bit on the initial pivot instantiation because it now sorts the data set (
O(nlogn)
operation vsO(n)
). The alternative was to keep track of the order but it would have been quite a bit more complicated and may not have been any more efficient.