Copying a convenient-looking one out of a CS book is how you end up with a bubble sort. Approximately nobody comes up with a bubble sort from scratch; it's obviously, gratuitously bad in a way that there's no practical reason to think of on your own. The sorts that people come up with without reference are usually insertion and selection sorts—those two were discovered before bubble sort.
I mean yeah, bubble sort is basically insertion sort but weirdly pessimized in a way that makes negative sense. Giving it a catchy name has probably been a net harm.
Plenty of children come up with bubble sort as a sorting algorithm. It’s intuitive to go down the list swapping any pairs that happen to be in the wrong order.
It's also very intuitive to pick out a misplaced item and put it in the right position. In the context of physical objects (e.g. playing cards), it's even more intuitive to come up with a (two-way) insertion sort than a bubble sort.
Nah, it’s not. Correctly implementing algorithms is hard; it’s easy to create incorrect behavior on edge cases and performance pitfalls. I’m sure you knew about the Java issue from a while back, for example.
People who think this way haven’t written boot code.. I suppose you’re gonna link the c runtime too and it’s assumption of being a “process” under some “operating system”.. oh wait.
Compared to the rest of the task, writing a sort is pretty darn trivial.
This is true if we're talking about the first stage bios boot that needs to fit in 512 bytes, but there aren't any particular restraints on kernel size at the point in question. Link in anything you want, including qsort.