Am 04.09.2010 15:08, schrieb Sven Barth:
> On 28.08.2010 11:57, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
>> Am 03.09.2010 21:31, schrieb Sven Barth:
>>> On 03.09.2010 18:02, Marco van de Voort wrote:
> Second, does FPC understand "tail recursion"?
Depends on version, do
fpc -i |grep -i t
Hello FPC-Pascal,
Saturday, September 4, 2010, 9:07:57 AM, you wrote:
RB> This a misunderstanding of way recursion can be flattened
RB> into a loop. It's especially not useful because the transformed
RB> version still uses a stack, so it doesn't execute in constant
RB> space.
I know, but as far
On 28.08.2010 11:57, Florian Klämpfl wrote:
Am 03.09.2010 21:31, schrieb Sven Barth:
On 03.09.2010 18:02, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Second, does FPC understand "tail recursion"?
Depends on version, do
fpc -i |grep -i tailrec
to find out more.
O.o
Ok... now I'm officially impressed.
W
Am 03.09.2010 21:31, schrieb Sven Barth:
> On 03.09.2010 18:02, Marco van de Voort wrote:
>>
>>> Second, does FPC understand "tail recursion"?
>>
>> Depends on version, do
>>
>> fpc -i |grep -i tailrec
>>
>> to find out more.
>
> O.o
>
> Ok... now I'm officially impressed.
Well, simple to implem
iate base-case value for "b") we can traverse any
tree in O(log(n)) space, irrespective of the type of values in the tree or the
type of operation performed on them.
Or we could if Pascal had a proper polymorphic type system. But it ain't, it's
too old-fashioned.
On 3 Se
On 03.09.2010 18:02, Marco van de Voort wrote:
Second, does FPC understand "tail recursion"?
Depends on version, do
fpc -i |grep -i tailrec
to find out more.
O.o
Ok... now I'm officially impressed.
Maybe it's time to reuse some of my OCaml knowledge from the 3rd term of
my study :D
R
In our previous episode, Bihar Anwar said:
> O Marco, I love you :-)
Better love Florian :-)
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
O Marco, I love you :-)
- Original Message
From: Marco van de Voort
To: FPC-Pascal users discussions
Sent: Fri, September 3, 2010 11:02:52 PM
Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Recursion optimization by compiler
> Second, does FPC understand "tail recursion"?
Depends on vers
> Second, does FPC understand "tail recursion"?
Depends on version, do
fpc -i |grep -i tailrec
to find out more.
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Hello FPC-Pascal,
Friday, September 3, 2010, 3:06:30 PM, you wrote:
BA> First, just curious, have somebody here ever benchmark performance between
BA> native stack and regular RAM as a stack?
Stack is RAM, so the only difference is in the algorithm used.
--
Best regards,
José
___
September 3, 2010 7:17:57 PM, José Mejuto wrote:
> That kind of "optimization" to me only seems interesting in
> two possible situations, when calling functions is high
> costly or when there is a very limited stack amount (really,
> really small). From my point of view if you need more that
> 1M
Hello FPC-Pascal,
Friday, September 3, 2010, 1:12:31 PM, you wrote:
BA> After my previous post, "TreeView and Nonrecursion", I'd tried to ask the
same
BA> topics in stackoverflow.com
BA>
(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3630047/treeview-control-and-nonrecursion)
BA> and I got something new.
After my previous post, "TreeView and Nonrecursion", I'd tried to ask the same
topics in stackoverflow.com
(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3630047/treeview-control-and-nonrecursion)
and I got something new.
It is possible to recurse without using up the stack space. Optimizing
compilers
13 matches
Mail list logo