Talk:Ackermann function: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Talk:Ackermann function (view source)

Revision as of 16:33, 7 March 2019

828 bytes added , 5 years ago

→‎Scala: Remove complex solution

Anonymous user

rosettacode>Ashawley

Revision as of 14:43, 1 November 2016 (view source) Hout (talk \| contribs) (→‎Main formula made invisible to many browsers by cosmetic edit of 00:19, 15 August 2016) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 16:33, 7 March 2019 (view source) rosettacode>Ashawley (→‎Scala: Remove complex solution)
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1: ===how well the C++ performs=== I don't really know how well my C++ function performs, as I said im just learning C++. but i though i would add it since there wasn't one. If something is wrong with it, please email me at ki4hbd(dot)nathan(at)gmail(dot)com and explain if you don't mind. Thanks! ===Arbitrary precision with BC=== Line 55: : Restored the lost visibility of server-side graphics formulae in the task description [[User:Hout\|Hout]] ([[User talk:Hout\|talk]]) 14:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC) ==Scala== I agree, the second solution in Scala was overly complex. As someone wrote the in "needs review": : The following part of this "heavily recursive" solution is way too complex and does not display the idiom of Scala. Memoization is possible with a stream (See final lesson of the Coursera course "Functional Programming Principles in Scala") which is much simpler and better displays the power of the language. There should be a memoized version, but keeping the wall of code wasn't going to get it there, so I ripped it out. If anyone wants to review it or reuse it, here's [https://rosettacode.org/mw/index.php?title=Ackermann_function&diff=278347&oldid=278346 the diff where it was removed]. --[[User:Ashawley\|Ashawley]] ([[User talk:Ashawley\|talk]]) 16:33, 7 March 2019 (UTC)