134

recursion (lemmy.ca)

submitted 10 months ago by dullbananas@lemmy.ca to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 40 points 10 months ago

is tail recursion really recursion?

[-] qarbone@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago

I wouldn't even really call this recursion. This is closer to a wrapper around the enjoy function to set variables so that "enjoy" doesn't throw an error.

[-] entropicdrift@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 10 months ago

The more accurate, yet not at all funny interpretation

[-] qarbone@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

I find it as funny as the original post

[-] HeckGazer@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

The best kind of funny

[-] sik0fewl@lemmy.ca 18 points 10 months ago

Depends on your optimization level.

[-] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 9 points 10 months ago

Oh. Now I get it. Thanks.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 10 months ago

Yes.

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs makes a distinction between recursive procedures and recursive process. A recursive procedure calls itself, but the compiler or runtime could potentially process it in an iterative way. The stack won't blow up. A recursive process, however, will always blow up the stack if left unchecked.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Out of milk: Killed process 8008135

Or, alternately, if step one doesn't internally handle the cap being missing it silently hangs or halts there, and the user is too busy catatonically staring at the spout to enjoy anything.