/prog/ - Iteration vs. Recursion

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:10

kgo

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:25

Iteration is like dodedodedo
but Recursion is like dddddoeoeo

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:40

“To iterate is human, to recurse divine.” - L. Peter Deutsch

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:53

Recur#SEGMENTATION FAULT

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 13:34

Recursion HBTCO.
Thread ended peacefully.[/aa]

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 20:58

Let's talk about languages that don't have recursion.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:13

Let's talk about recursions that don't have languages

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:18

>>6
Brainfuck.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:29

Each can substitute for the other. I see no superior construct out of the two.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:52

>>9
Then implement a compiler that translates a minimalistic language that can do recursion to Brainfuck. Have fun.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 22:05

>>10
I meant when writing code. Although it is entirely possible.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 22:11

Hm, it would be cool to implement a virtual CPU in Brainfuck and have it execute from its own memory, which would be loaded before boot-up. I might actually do this if I get too bored.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 21:15

recursion is recursion

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 21:19

iter = ""; begin: iter+="iterative is " goto begin;

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 21:42

>>14
s/ve/on/

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:01

iteration > recursion

Iteration might produce larger code, but you're pretty much guaranteed never to cause a stack overflow. Also, with iteration, your code would probably be faster as well.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:18

>>16
Not if YHBTCO.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:28

>>10
That's quite easy, actually. Implementing stack in bf is straightforward.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:35

>>16
You don't get stack overflows in The Go Programming Language.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:42

>>19
You don't get laid

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 5:50

http://shiman.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/recursion-vs-iteration/

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 5:58

>>19
U MENA The D Programming Language.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 6:03

>>21
More like "naive recursion vs memoized-but-still-naive recursion vs iteration".

As someone mentioned in this thread, tail-call recursion with TCO gets optimised to a simple jump, like a loop.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 12:14

>>24

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 12:53

>>21
static Dictionary resultHistory = new Dictionary();
Yeah. "Optimised."

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 21:50



//Shit code

void main(void){

    int i;

    for(i=0;i<10;i++)

        fprintf(stdout,"IHBT");

}

[code]



[code]

//Best code

void print(char[] s, int i,int c){

    fprintf(s);

    if(i>c)

        return;

    print(s,i+1,c);

}



void main(void){

    print("IHBT",0,9);

}

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 1:58

>>26
print(s,i+1,c);

PIG DISGUSTING

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 6:27

I'M A FUNCTIONAL PROGRAMMING
SON OF A BITCH IMPERATIVE PROGRAMMING
IMPERATIVE PROGRAMMING IS PIG
DO YOU WANT A STATE?
DO YOU WANT SIDE EFFECTS?
IMPERATIVE PROGRAMMING IS PIG DISGUSTING
C IS A MURDERER
FUCK IMPERATIVE PROGRAMMING

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 9:33

>>26
Why do you need the second variable?



if (c == 0)

   return;

print (s, c-1);

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:11

free beer as in free beer.

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:32

Doesn't recursion suck in terms of performance, in each turn of recursion pushing the local state to stack, making things uglier and uglier?

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:33

free pleasure as in sex

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:35

>>31
see >>17,23

Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 22:16

>>31
only if the lower items have to be accessed in later iterations. Any recursive function in C shouldn't give you any problems if you turn on optimization. But if it does you'd better refactor it anyway.
It's also very practical to write a recursive function in forth first to test it out.

Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 16:16

Don't change these.

Name:		Email:

Entire Thread Thread List

Iteration vs. Recursion

1 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:10

2 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:25

3 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:40

4 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 7:53

5 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 13:34

6 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 20:58

7 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:13

8 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:18

9 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:29

10 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 21:52

11 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 22:05

12 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-09 22:11

13 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 21:15

14 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 21:19

15 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-10 21:42

16 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:01

17 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:18

18 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:28

19 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:35

20 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 1:42

21 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 5:50

22 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 5:58

23 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 6:03

24 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 12:14

25 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 12:53

26 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-11 21:50

27 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 1:58

28 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 6:27

29 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 9:33

30 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:11

31 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:32

32 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:33

33 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 11:35

34 Name: Anonymous 2010-12-12 22:16

35 Name: Anonymous 2011-02-04 16:16