If, in Lisp|Perl|C|whatever, you write a recursive function that runs a few thousand times, then you're going to suck up some RAM and the stack-push/pop CPU time. LISP, Scheme, ML, and their compadres are pretty well designed to minimize this. But, if you write a tail-recursive function, you're fine; overhead is exactly the same as for iteration.
Tail recursion can be converted directly into iteration; this is part of the Scheme standard, I believe, and most implementations of other functional languages support it. If you're unlucky enough to have an implementation that doesn't, though, tail recursion will still suck up stack space for function calls.
--
F
o
x
t
r
o
t
U
n
i
f
o
r
m
Found a typo in this node? /msg me
% man 3 strfry
In reply to Re^3: map: chaining vs. nesting
by FoxtrotUniform
in thread map: chaining vs. nesting
by Roy Johnson
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |