Timeline for If the whole point of recursion is to break the problem into multiple smaller problems, what if those problems were solved in parallel?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jun 21, 2019 at 15:38 | comment | added | user339013 | Let us continue this discussion in chat. | |
Jun 21, 2019 at 15:28 | comment | added | user339013 | @Robert i got your point | |
Jun 21, 2019 at 15:22 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | @who: Have a look here: geeksforgeeks.org/tail-recursion. It contains a Factorial example. | |
Jun 21, 2019 at 15:17 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | @who: This isn't a debate on the relative merits of recursion vs. iteration. I assume you know what tail recursion is? | |
Jun 21, 2019 at 15:06 | comment | added | user339013 | have you tried 100 factorial with recursion?? without recursion it is possible. similar algorithm with recursion and python complains max recursion depth exceeded error (correct me if i am wrong) | |
Jun 21, 2019 at 15:04 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | @who: Normally that doesn't happen unless you have an infinite recursion error. | |
Jun 21, 2019 at 14:59 | comment | added | user339013 | what about recursion max depth exceeded error? using iterators may be clumsy but seeing it does just fine | |
May 6, 2019 at 16:29 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | Sure, but not nearly as elegantly. As you already know, any recursive algorithm can also be solved iteratively. You just need to provide your own stack. | |
May 5, 2019 at 18:35 | comment | added | Deduplicator | Naturally, this problem is trivially solved with the same number of iterations instead. | |
May 3, 2019 at 21:03 | vote | accept | João Areias | ||
May 2, 2019 at 22:37 | history | edited | Robert Harvey | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 62 characters in body
|
May 2, 2019 at 22:25 | history | edited | Robert Harvey | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 52 characters in body
|
May 2, 2019 at 22:20 | history | answered | Robert Harvey | CC BY-SA 4.0 |