Optimizing a Partition Method

I am looking for assistance in optimizing a partition method I wrote for a class. It does its job correctly, but I only received half points on it, so I was wondering if there was a way to make it more efficient?

private int runPartition(int lowIndex, int highIndex)
{
//Sets up pivot index and values
int pivotIndex = lowIndex;
int pivotValue = localArray[pivotIndex];

//Inner counter value
int counterOne = highIndex + 1;

//Loops through array from top down
for (int counterTwo = highIndex; counterTwo >= lowIndex; counterTwo--)
{
//If element is bigger than pivot, move to end
if (localArray[counterTwo] > pivotValue)
{
//Decrements inner counter and swaps values
counterOne--;
swapValuesAtIndex(counterTwo, counterOne);
}
}

//At end, swap pivot value with value BEFORE larger elements
counterOne--;
swapValuesAtIndex(counterOne, pivotIndex);

//Sets new pivot index and returns
pivotIndex = counterOne;
return pivotIndex;
}

• When you say "partition method", can you specify exactly what you mean to avoid any potential confusion? – Simon Forsberg Feb 24 at 14:57
• Yes - this method partitions the array around the top index in the array. For example, for an array of {3, 9, 6}, the number 6 would be the partition index, and the other items would be sorted so that the numbers equal to or less than 6 would come before it, and the numbers greater than 6 would come after it. This method is used in a quick sort method. – Richard McCormick Feb 27 at 9:21

• runPartition is rather an unclear name in itself;
• highIndex seems to be inclusive, which is uncommon (the number of elements is now highIndex - lowIndex + 1);
• counterOne and counterTwo are not good names for indices - even i and j would have been better;
• it is very likely that the localArray as a field name raises some questions; why is it a field in the first place? And why is it called local if it is not local to the method?
• it seems to me that you would set the counterOne to the index you want to swap and perform the decrease afterwards (possibly using -- in the call to swapValues);