Racket

there must be a better way to do this right


(define (factorial n)
    (define (iter n result)
        (if (= n 0)
            result
            (iter (- n 1) (* result n))))
    (iter n 1))

>>5
Now that we are talking about implementation details I would like to bring notice that the function would not produce a stack overflow when compiled with GCC and optimization on x86, the call instruction is nowhere to be found in the resulting object code it only uses jmp.