Related
I have this tail recursive function here:
def recursive_function(n, sum):
if n < 1:
return sum
else:
return recursive_function(n-1, sum+n)
c = 998
print(recursive_function(c, 0))
It works up to n=997, then it just breaks and spits out a RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison. Is this just a stack overflow? Is there a way to get around it?
It is a guard against a stack overflow, yes. Python (or rather, the CPython implementation) doesn't optimize tail recursion, and unbridled recursion causes stack overflows. You can check the recursion limit with sys.getrecursionlimit:
import sys
print(sys.getrecursionlimit())
and change the recursion limit with sys.setrecursionlimit:
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
but doing so is dangerous -- the standard limit is a little conservative, but Python stackframes can be quite big.
Python isn't a functional language and tail recursion is not a particularly efficient technique. Rewriting the algorithm iteratively, if possible, is generally a better idea.
Looks like you just need to set a higher recursion depth:
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
If you often need to change the recursion limit (e.g. while solving programming puzzles) you can define a simple context manager like this:
import sys
class recursionlimit:
def __init__(self, limit):
self.limit = limit
def __enter__(self):
self.old_limit = sys.getrecursionlimit()
sys.setrecursionlimit(self.limit)
def __exit__(self, type, value, tb):
sys.setrecursionlimit(self.old_limit)
Then to call a function with a custom limit you can do:
with recursionlimit(1500):
print(fib(1000, 0))
On exit from the body of the with statement the recursion limit will be restored to the default value.
P.S. You may also want to increase the stack size of the Python process for big values of the recursion limit. That can be done via the ulimit shell builtin or limits.conf(5) file, for example.
It's to avoid a stack overflow. The Python interpreter limits the depths of recursion to help you avoid infinite recursions, resulting in stack overflows.
Try increasing the recursion limit (sys.setrecursionlimit) or re-writing your code without recursion.
From the Python documentation:
sys.getrecursionlimit()
Return the current value of the recursion limit, the maximum depth of the Python interpreter stack. This limit prevents infinite recursion from causing an overflow of the C stack and crashing Python. It can be set by setrecursionlimit().
resource.setrlimit must also be used to increase the stack size and prevent segfault
The Linux kernel limits the stack of processes.
Python stores local variables on the stack of the interpreter, and so recursion takes up stack space of the interpreter.
If the Python interpreter tries to go over the stack limit, the Linux kernel makes it segmentation fault.
The stack limit size is controlled with the getrlimit and setrlimit system calls.
Python offers access to those system calls through the resource module.
sys.setrecursionlimit mentioned e.g. at https://stackoverflow.com/a/3323013/895245 only increases the limit that the Python interpreter self imposes on its own stack size, but it does not touch the limit imposed by the Linux kernel on the Python process.
Example program:
main.py
import resource
import sys
print resource.getrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_STACK)
print sys.getrecursionlimit()
print
# Will segfault without this line.
resource.setrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_STACK, [0x10000000, resource.RLIM_INFINITY])
sys.setrecursionlimit(0x100000)
def f(i):
print i
sys.stdout.flush()
f(i + 1)
f(0)
Of course, if you keep increasing setrlimit, your RAM will eventually run out, which will either slow your computer to a halt due to swap madness, or kill Python via the OOM Killer.
From bash, you can see and set the stack limit (in kb) with:
ulimit -s
ulimit -s 10000
The default value for me is 8Mb.
See also:
Setting stacksize in a python script
What is the hard recursion limit for Linux, Mac and Windows?
Tested on Ubuntu 16.10, Python 2.7.12.
Use a language that guarantees tail-call optimisation. Or use iteration. Alternatively, get cute with decorators.
I realize this is an old question but for those reading, I would recommend against using recursion for problems such as this - lists are much faster and avoid recursion entirely. I would implement this as:
def fibonacci(n):
f = [0,1,1]
for i in xrange(3,n):
f.append(f[i-1] + f[i-2])
return 'The %.0fth fibonacci number is: %.0f' % (n,f[-1])
(Use n+1 in xrange if you start counting your fibonacci sequence from 0 instead of 1.)
I had a similar issue with the error "Max recursion depth exceeded". I discovered the error was being triggered by a corrupt file in the directory I was looping over with os.walk. If you have trouble solving this issue and you are working with file paths, be sure to narrow it down, as it might be a corrupt file.
If you want to get only few Fibonacci numbers, you can use matrix method.
from numpy import matrix
def fib(n):
return (matrix('0 1; 1 1', dtype='object') ** n).item(1)
It's fast as numpy uses fast exponentiation algorithm. You get answer in O(log n). And it's better than Binet's formula because it uses only integers. But if you want all Fibonacci numbers up to n, then it's better to do it by memorisation.
Of course Fibonacci numbers can be computed in O(n) by applying the Binet formula:
from math import floor, sqrt
def fib(n):
return int(floor(((1+sqrt(5))**n-(1-sqrt(5))**n)/(2**n*sqrt(5))+0.5))
As the commenters note it's not O(1) but O(n) because of 2**n. Also a difference is that you only get one value, while with recursion you get all values of Fibonacci(n) up to that value.
RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison
Solution :
First it’s better to know when you execute a recursive function in Python on a large input ( > 10^4), you might encounter a “maximum recursion depth exceeded error”.
The sys module in Python have a function getrecursionlimit() can show the recursion limit in your Python version.
import sys
print("Python Recursive Limitation = ", sys.getrecursionlimit())
The default in some version of Python is 1000 and in some other it was 1500
You can change this limitation but it’s very important to know if you increase it very much you will have memory overflow error.
So be careful before increase it. You can use setrecursionlimit() to increase this limitation in Python.
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(3000)
Please follow this link for more information about somethings cause this issue :
https://elvand.com/quick-sort-binary-search/
We can do that using #lru_cache decorator and setrecursionlimit() method:
import sys
from functools import lru_cache
sys.setrecursionlimit(15000)
#lru_cache(128)
def fib(n: int) -> int:
if n == 0:
return 0
if n == 1:
return 1
return fib(n - 2) + fib(n - 1)
print(fib(14000))
Output
3002468761178461090995494179715025648692747937490792943468375429502230242942284835863402333575216217865811638730389352239181342307756720414619391217798542575996541081060501905302157019002614964717310808809478675602711440361241500732699145834377856326394037071666274321657305320804055307021019793251762830816701587386994888032362232198219843549865275880699612359275125243457132496772854886508703396643365042454333009802006384286859581649296390803003232654898464561589234445139863242606285711591746222880807391057211912655818499798720987302540712067959840802106849776547522247429904618357394771725653253559346195282601285019169360207355179223814857106405285007997547692546378757062999581657867188420995770650565521377874333085963123444258953052751461206977615079511435862879678439081175536265576977106865074099512897235100538241196445815568291377846656352979228098911566675956525644182645608178603837172227838896725425605719942300037650526231486881066037397866942013838296769284745527778439272995067231492069369130289154753132313883294398593507873555667211005422003204156154859031529462152953119957597195735953686798871131148255050140450845034240095305094449911578598539658855704158240221809528010179414493499583473568873253067921639513996596738275817909624857593693291980841303291145613566466575233283651420134915764961372875933822262953420444548349180436583183291944875599477240814774580187144637965487250578134990402443365677985388481961492444981994523034245619781853365476552719460960795929666883665704293897310201276011658074359194189359660792496027472226428571547971602259808697441435358578480589837766911684200275636889192254762678512597000452676191374475932796663842865744658264924913771676415404179920096074751516422872997665425047457428327276230059296132722787915300105002019006293320082955378715908263653377755031155794063450515731009402407584683132870206376994025920790298591144213659942668622062191441346200098342943955169522532574271644954360217472458521489671859465232568419404182043966092211744372699797375966048010775453444600153524772238401414789562651410289808994960533132759532092895779406940925252906166612153699850759933762897947175972147868784008320247586210378556711332739463277940255289047962323306946068381887446046387745247925675240182981190836264964640612069909458682443392729946084099312047752966806439331403663934969942958022237945205992581178803606156982034385347182766573351768749665172549908638337611953199808161937885366709285043276595726484068138091188914698151703122773726725261370542355162118164302728812259192476428938730724109825922331973256105091200551566581350508061922762910078528219869913214146575557249199263634241165352226570749618907050553115468306669184485910269806225894530809823102279231750061652042560772530576713148647858705369649642907780603247428680176236527220826640665659902650188140474762163503557640566711903907798932853656216227739411210513756695569391593763704981001125
Source
functools lru_cache
As #alex suggested, you could use a generator function to do this sequentially instead of recursively.
Here's the equivalent of the code in your question:
def fib(n):
def fibseq(n):
""" Iteratively return the first n Fibonacci numbers, starting from 0. """
a, b = 0, 1
for _ in xrange(n):
yield a
a, b = b, a + b
return sum(v for v in fibseq(n))
print format(fib(100000), ',d') # -> no recursion depth error
Edit: 6 years later I realized my "Use generators" was flippant and didn't answer the question. My apologies.
I guess my first question would be: do you really need to change the recursion limit? If not, then perhaps my or any of the other answers that don't deal with changing the recursion limit will apply. Otherwise, as noted, override the recursion limit using sys.getrecursionlimit(n).
Use generators?
def fib():
a, b = 0, 1
while True:
yield a
a, b = b, a + b
fibs = fib() #seems to be the only way to get the following line to work is to
#assign the infinite generator to a variable
f = [fibs.next() for x in xrange(1001)]
for num in f:
print num
Above fib() function adapted from Introduction to Python Generators.
Many recommend that increasing recursion limit is a good solution however it is not because there will be always limit. Instead use an iterative solution.
def fib(n):
a,b = 1,1
for i in range(n-1):
a,b = b,a+b
return a
print fib(5)
I wanted to give you an example for using memoization to compute Fibonacci as this will allow you to compute significantly larger numbers using recursion:
cache = {}
def fib_dp(n):
if n in cache:
return cache[n]
if n == 0: return 0
elif n == 1: return 1
else:
value = fib_dp(n-1) + fib_dp(n-2)
cache[n] = value
return value
print(fib_dp(998))
This is still recursive, but uses a simple hashtable that allows the reuse of previously calculated Fibonacci numbers instead of doing them again.
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
def fib(n, sum):
if n < 1:
return sum
else:
return fib(n-1, sum+n)
c = 998
print(fib(c, 0))
We could also use a variation of dynamic programming bottom up approach
def fib_bottom_up(n):
bottom_up = [None] * (n+1)
bottom_up[0] = 1
bottom_up[1] = 1
for i in range(2, n+1):
bottom_up[i] = bottom_up[i-1] + bottom_up[i-2]
return bottom_up[n]
print(fib_bottom_up(20000))
I'm not sure I'm repeating someone but some time ago some good soul wrote Y-operator for recursively called function like:
def tail_recursive(func):
y_operator = (lambda f: (lambda y: y(y))(lambda x: f(lambda *args: lambda: x(x)(*args))))(func)
def wrap_func_tail(*args):
out = y_operator(*args)
while callable(out): out = out()
return out
return wrap_func_tail
and then recursive function needs form:
def my_recursive_func(g):
def wrapped(some_arg, acc):
if <condition>: return acc
return g(some_arg, acc)
return wrapped
# and finally you call it in code
(tail_recursive(my_recursive_func))(some_arg, acc)
for Fibonacci numbers your function looks like this:
def fib(g):
def wrapped(n_1, n_2, n):
if n == 0: return n_1
return g(n_2, n_1 + n_2, n-1)
return wrapped
print((tail_recursive(fib))(0, 1, 1000000))
output:
..684684301719893411568996526838242546875
(actually tones of digits)
I have this tail recursive function here:
def recursive_function(n, sum):
if n < 1:
return sum
else:
return recursive_function(n-1, sum+n)
c = 998
print(recursive_function(c, 0))
It works up to n=997, then it just breaks and spits out a RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison. Is this just a stack overflow? Is there a way to get around it?
It is a guard against a stack overflow, yes. Python (or rather, the CPython implementation) doesn't optimize tail recursion, and unbridled recursion causes stack overflows. You can check the recursion limit with sys.getrecursionlimit:
import sys
print(sys.getrecursionlimit())
and change the recursion limit with sys.setrecursionlimit:
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
but doing so is dangerous -- the standard limit is a little conservative, but Python stackframes can be quite big.
Python isn't a functional language and tail recursion is not a particularly efficient technique. Rewriting the algorithm iteratively, if possible, is generally a better idea.
Looks like you just need to set a higher recursion depth:
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
If you often need to change the recursion limit (e.g. while solving programming puzzles) you can define a simple context manager like this:
import sys
class recursionlimit:
def __init__(self, limit):
self.limit = limit
def __enter__(self):
self.old_limit = sys.getrecursionlimit()
sys.setrecursionlimit(self.limit)
def __exit__(self, type, value, tb):
sys.setrecursionlimit(self.old_limit)
Then to call a function with a custom limit you can do:
with recursionlimit(1500):
print(fib(1000, 0))
On exit from the body of the with statement the recursion limit will be restored to the default value.
P.S. You may also want to increase the stack size of the Python process for big values of the recursion limit. That can be done via the ulimit shell builtin or limits.conf(5) file, for example.
It's to avoid a stack overflow. The Python interpreter limits the depths of recursion to help you avoid infinite recursions, resulting in stack overflows.
Try increasing the recursion limit (sys.setrecursionlimit) or re-writing your code without recursion.
From the Python documentation:
sys.getrecursionlimit()
Return the current value of the recursion limit, the maximum depth of the Python interpreter stack. This limit prevents infinite recursion from causing an overflow of the C stack and crashing Python. It can be set by setrecursionlimit().
resource.setrlimit must also be used to increase the stack size and prevent segfault
The Linux kernel limits the stack of processes.
Python stores local variables on the stack of the interpreter, and so recursion takes up stack space of the interpreter.
If the Python interpreter tries to go over the stack limit, the Linux kernel makes it segmentation fault.
The stack limit size is controlled with the getrlimit and setrlimit system calls.
Python offers access to those system calls through the resource module.
sys.setrecursionlimit mentioned e.g. at https://stackoverflow.com/a/3323013/895245 only increases the limit that the Python interpreter self imposes on its own stack size, but it does not touch the limit imposed by the Linux kernel on the Python process.
Example program:
main.py
import resource
import sys
print resource.getrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_STACK)
print sys.getrecursionlimit()
print
# Will segfault without this line.
resource.setrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_STACK, [0x10000000, resource.RLIM_INFINITY])
sys.setrecursionlimit(0x100000)
def f(i):
print i
sys.stdout.flush()
f(i + 1)
f(0)
Of course, if you keep increasing setrlimit, your RAM will eventually run out, which will either slow your computer to a halt due to swap madness, or kill Python via the OOM Killer.
From bash, you can see and set the stack limit (in kb) with:
ulimit -s
ulimit -s 10000
The default value for me is 8Mb.
See also:
Setting stacksize in a python script
What is the hard recursion limit for Linux, Mac and Windows?
Tested on Ubuntu 16.10, Python 2.7.12.
Use a language that guarantees tail-call optimisation. Or use iteration. Alternatively, get cute with decorators.
I realize this is an old question but for those reading, I would recommend against using recursion for problems such as this - lists are much faster and avoid recursion entirely. I would implement this as:
def fibonacci(n):
f = [0,1,1]
for i in xrange(3,n):
f.append(f[i-1] + f[i-2])
return 'The %.0fth fibonacci number is: %.0f' % (n,f[-1])
(Use n+1 in xrange if you start counting your fibonacci sequence from 0 instead of 1.)
I had a similar issue with the error "Max recursion depth exceeded". I discovered the error was being triggered by a corrupt file in the directory I was looping over with os.walk. If you have trouble solving this issue and you are working with file paths, be sure to narrow it down, as it might be a corrupt file.
If you want to get only few Fibonacci numbers, you can use matrix method.
from numpy import matrix
def fib(n):
return (matrix('0 1; 1 1', dtype='object') ** n).item(1)
It's fast as numpy uses fast exponentiation algorithm. You get answer in O(log n). And it's better than Binet's formula because it uses only integers. But if you want all Fibonacci numbers up to n, then it's better to do it by memorisation.
Of course Fibonacci numbers can be computed in O(n) by applying the Binet formula:
from math import floor, sqrt
def fib(n):
return int(floor(((1+sqrt(5))**n-(1-sqrt(5))**n)/(2**n*sqrt(5))+0.5))
As the commenters note it's not O(1) but O(n) because of 2**n. Also a difference is that you only get one value, while with recursion you get all values of Fibonacci(n) up to that value.
RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison
Solution :
First it’s better to know when you execute a recursive function in Python on a large input ( > 10^4), you might encounter a “maximum recursion depth exceeded error”.
The sys module in Python have a function getrecursionlimit() can show the recursion limit in your Python version.
import sys
print("Python Recursive Limitation = ", sys.getrecursionlimit())
The default in some version of Python is 1000 and in some other it was 1500
You can change this limitation but it’s very important to know if you increase it very much you will have memory overflow error.
So be careful before increase it. You can use setrecursionlimit() to increase this limitation in Python.
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(3000)
Please follow this link for more information about somethings cause this issue :
https://elvand.com/quick-sort-binary-search/
We can do that using #lru_cache decorator and setrecursionlimit() method:
import sys
from functools import lru_cache
sys.setrecursionlimit(15000)
#lru_cache(128)
def fib(n: int) -> int:
if n == 0:
return 0
if n == 1:
return 1
return fib(n - 2) + fib(n - 1)
print(fib(14000))
Output
3002468761178461090995494179715025648692747937490792943468375429502230242942284835863402333575216217865811638730389352239181342307756720414619391217798542575996541081060501905302157019002614964717310808809478675602711440361241500732699145834377856326394037071666274321657305320804055307021019793251762830816701587386994888032362232198219843549865275880699612359275125243457132496772854886508703396643365042454333009802006384286859581649296390803003232654898464561589234445139863242606285711591746222880807391057211912655818499798720987302540712067959840802106849776547522247429904618357394771725653253559346195282601285019169360207355179223814857106405285007997547692546378757062999581657867188420995770650565521377874333085963123444258953052751461206977615079511435862879678439081175536265576977106865074099512897235100538241196445815568291377846656352979228098911566675956525644182645608178603837172227838896725425605719942300037650526231486881066037397866942013838296769284745527778439272995067231492069369130289154753132313883294398593507873555667211005422003204156154859031529462152953119957597195735953686798871131148255050140450845034240095305094449911578598539658855704158240221809528010179414493499583473568873253067921639513996596738275817909624857593693291980841303291145613566466575233283651420134915764961372875933822262953420444548349180436583183291944875599477240814774580187144637965487250578134990402443365677985388481961492444981994523034245619781853365476552719460960795929666883665704293897310201276011658074359194189359660792496027472226428571547971602259808697441435358578480589837766911684200275636889192254762678512597000452676191374475932796663842865744658264924913771676415404179920096074751516422872997665425047457428327276230059296132722787915300105002019006293320082955378715908263653377755031155794063450515731009402407584683132870206376994025920790298591144213659942668622062191441346200098342943955169522532574271644954360217472458521489671859465232568419404182043966092211744372699797375966048010775453444600153524772238401414789562651410289808994960533132759532092895779406940925252906166612153699850759933762897947175972147868784008320247586210378556711332739463277940255289047962323306946068381887446046387745247925675240182981190836264964640612069909458682443392729946084099312047752966806439331403663934969942958022237945205992581178803606156982034385347182766573351768749665172549908638337611953199808161937885366709285043276595726484068138091188914698151703122773726725261370542355162118164302728812259192476428938730724109825922331973256105091200551566581350508061922762910078528219869913214146575557249199263634241165352226570749618907050553115468306669184485910269806225894530809823102279231750061652042560772530576713148647858705369649642907780603247428680176236527220826640665659902650188140474762163503557640566711903907798932853656216227739411210513756695569391593763704981001125
Source
functools lru_cache
As #alex suggested, you could use a generator function to do this sequentially instead of recursively.
Here's the equivalent of the code in your question:
def fib(n):
def fibseq(n):
""" Iteratively return the first n Fibonacci numbers, starting from 0. """
a, b = 0, 1
for _ in xrange(n):
yield a
a, b = b, a + b
return sum(v for v in fibseq(n))
print format(fib(100000), ',d') # -> no recursion depth error
Edit: 6 years later I realized my "Use generators" was flippant and didn't answer the question. My apologies.
I guess my first question would be: do you really need to change the recursion limit? If not, then perhaps my or any of the other answers that don't deal with changing the recursion limit will apply. Otherwise, as noted, override the recursion limit using sys.getrecursionlimit(n).
Use generators?
def fib():
a, b = 0, 1
while True:
yield a
a, b = b, a + b
fibs = fib() #seems to be the only way to get the following line to work is to
#assign the infinite generator to a variable
f = [fibs.next() for x in xrange(1001)]
for num in f:
print num
Above fib() function adapted from Introduction to Python Generators.
Many recommend that increasing recursion limit is a good solution however it is not because there will be always limit. Instead use an iterative solution.
def fib(n):
a,b = 1,1
for i in range(n-1):
a,b = b,a+b
return a
print fib(5)
I wanted to give you an example for using memoization to compute Fibonacci as this will allow you to compute significantly larger numbers using recursion:
cache = {}
def fib_dp(n):
if n in cache:
return cache[n]
if n == 0: return 0
elif n == 1: return 1
else:
value = fib_dp(n-1) + fib_dp(n-2)
cache[n] = value
return value
print(fib_dp(998))
This is still recursive, but uses a simple hashtable that allows the reuse of previously calculated Fibonacci numbers instead of doing them again.
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
def fib(n, sum):
if n < 1:
return sum
else:
return fib(n-1, sum+n)
c = 998
print(fib(c, 0))
We could also use a variation of dynamic programming bottom up approach
def fib_bottom_up(n):
bottom_up = [None] * (n+1)
bottom_up[0] = 1
bottom_up[1] = 1
for i in range(2, n+1):
bottom_up[i] = bottom_up[i-1] + bottom_up[i-2]
return bottom_up[n]
print(fib_bottom_up(20000))
I'm not sure I'm repeating someone but some time ago some good soul wrote Y-operator for recursively called function like:
def tail_recursive(func):
y_operator = (lambda f: (lambda y: y(y))(lambda x: f(lambda *args: lambda: x(x)(*args))))(func)
def wrap_func_tail(*args):
out = y_operator(*args)
while callable(out): out = out()
return out
return wrap_func_tail
and then recursive function needs form:
def my_recursive_func(g):
def wrapped(some_arg, acc):
if <condition>: return acc
return g(some_arg, acc)
return wrapped
# and finally you call it in code
(tail_recursive(my_recursive_func))(some_arg, acc)
for Fibonacci numbers your function looks like this:
def fib(g):
def wrapped(n_1, n_2, n):
if n == 0: return n_1
return g(n_2, n_1 + n_2, n-1)
return wrapped
print((tail_recursive(fib))(0, 1, 1000000))
output:
..684684301719893411568996526838242546875
(actually tones of digits)
I have this tail recursive function here:
def recursive_function(n, sum):
if n < 1:
return sum
else:
return recursive_function(n-1, sum+n)
c = 998
print(recursive_function(c, 0))
It works up to n=997, then it just breaks and spits out a RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison. Is this just a stack overflow? Is there a way to get around it?
It is a guard against a stack overflow, yes. Python (or rather, the CPython implementation) doesn't optimize tail recursion, and unbridled recursion causes stack overflows. You can check the recursion limit with sys.getrecursionlimit:
import sys
print(sys.getrecursionlimit())
and change the recursion limit with sys.setrecursionlimit:
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
but doing so is dangerous -- the standard limit is a little conservative, but Python stackframes can be quite big.
Python isn't a functional language and tail recursion is not a particularly efficient technique. Rewriting the algorithm iteratively, if possible, is generally a better idea.
Looks like you just need to set a higher recursion depth:
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
If you often need to change the recursion limit (e.g. while solving programming puzzles) you can define a simple context manager like this:
import sys
class recursionlimit:
def __init__(self, limit):
self.limit = limit
def __enter__(self):
self.old_limit = sys.getrecursionlimit()
sys.setrecursionlimit(self.limit)
def __exit__(self, type, value, tb):
sys.setrecursionlimit(self.old_limit)
Then to call a function with a custom limit you can do:
with recursionlimit(1500):
print(fib(1000, 0))
On exit from the body of the with statement the recursion limit will be restored to the default value.
P.S. You may also want to increase the stack size of the Python process for big values of the recursion limit. That can be done via the ulimit shell builtin or limits.conf(5) file, for example.
It's to avoid a stack overflow. The Python interpreter limits the depths of recursion to help you avoid infinite recursions, resulting in stack overflows.
Try increasing the recursion limit (sys.setrecursionlimit) or re-writing your code without recursion.
From the Python documentation:
sys.getrecursionlimit()
Return the current value of the recursion limit, the maximum depth of the Python interpreter stack. This limit prevents infinite recursion from causing an overflow of the C stack and crashing Python. It can be set by setrecursionlimit().
resource.setrlimit must also be used to increase the stack size and prevent segfault
The Linux kernel limits the stack of processes.
Python stores local variables on the stack of the interpreter, and so recursion takes up stack space of the interpreter.
If the Python interpreter tries to go over the stack limit, the Linux kernel makes it segmentation fault.
The stack limit size is controlled with the getrlimit and setrlimit system calls.
Python offers access to those system calls through the resource module.
sys.setrecursionlimit mentioned e.g. at https://stackoverflow.com/a/3323013/895245 only increases the limit that the Python interpreter self imposes on its own stack size, but it does not touch the limit imposed by the Linux kernel on the Python process.
Example program:
main.py
import resource
import sys
print resource.getrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_STACK)
print sys.getrecursionlimit()
print
# Will segfault without this line.
resource.setrlimit(resource.RLIMIT_STACK, [0x10000000, resource.RLIM_INFINITY])
sys.setrecursionlimit(0x100000)
def f(i):
print i
sys.stdout.flush()
f(i + 1)
f(0)
Of course, if you keep increasing setrlimit, your RAM will eventually run out, which will either slow your computer to a halt due to swap madness, or kill Python via the OOM Killer.
From bash, you can see and set the stack limit (in kb) with:
ulimit -s
ulimit -s 10000
The default value for me is 8Mb.
See also:
Setting stacksize in a python script
What is the hard recursion limit for Linux, Mac and Windows?
Tested on Ubuntu 16.10, Python 2.7.12.
Use a language that guarantees tail-call optimisation. Or use iteration. Alternatively, get cute with decorators.
I realize this is an old question but for those reading, I would recommend against using recursion for problems such as this - lists are much faster and avoid recursion entirely. I would implement this as:
def fibonacci(n):
f = [0,1,1]
for i in xrange(3,n):
f.append(f[i-1] + f[i-2])
return 'The %.0fth fibonacci number is: %.0f' % (n,f[-1])
(Use n+1 in xrange if you start counting your fibonacci sequence from 0 instead of 1.)
I had a similar issue with the error "Max recursion depth exceeded". I discovered the error was being triggered by a corrupt file in the directory I was looping over with os.walk. If you have trouble solving this issue and you are working with file paths, be sure to narrow it down, as it might be a corrupt file.
If you want to get only few Fibonacci numbers, you can use matrix method.
from numpy import matrix
def fib(n):
return (matrix('0 1; 1 1', dtype='object') ** n).item(1)
It's fast as numpy uses fast exponentiation algorithm. You get answer in O(log n). And it's better than Binet's formula because it uses only integers. But if you want all Fibonacci numbers up to n, then it's better to do it by memorisation.
Of course Fibonacci numbers can be computed in O(n) by applying the Binet formula:
from math import floor, sqrt
def fib(n):
return int(floor(((1+sqrt(5))**n-(1-sqrt(5))**n)/(2**n*sqrt(5))+0.5))
As the commenters note it's not O(1) but O(n) because of 2**n. Also a difference is that you only get one value, while with recursion you get all values of Fibonacci(n) up to that value.
RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison
Solution :
First it’s better to know when you execute a recursive function in Python on a large input ( > 10^4), you might encounter a “maximum recursion depth exceeded error”.
The sys module in Python have a function getrecursionlimit() can show the recursion limit in your Python version.
import sys
print("Python Recursive Limitation = ", sys.getrecursionlimit())
The default in some version of Python is 1000 and in some other it was 1500
You can change this limitation but it’s very important to know if you increase it very much you will have memory overflow error.
So be careful before increase it. You can use setrecursionlimit() to increase this limitation in Python.
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(3000)
Please follow this link for more information about somethings cause this issue :
https://elvand.com/quick-sort-binary-search/
We can do that using #lru_cache decorator and setrecursionlimit() method:
import sys
from functools import lru_cache
sys.setrecursionlimit(15000)
#lru_cache(128)
def fib(n: int) -> int:
if n == 0:
return 0
if n == 1:
return 1
return fib(n - 2) + fib(n - 1)
print(fib(14000))
Output
3002468761178461090995494179715025648692747937490792943468375429502230242942284835863402333575216217865811638730389352239181342307756720414619391217798542575996541081060501905302157019002614964717310808809478675602711440361241500732699145834377856326394037071666274321657305320804055307021019793251762830816701587386994888032362232198219843549865275880699612359275125243457132496772854886508703396643365042454333009802006384286859581649296390803003232654898464561589234445139863242606285711591746222880807391057211912655818499798720987302540712067959840802106849776547522247429904618357394771725653253559346195282601285019169360207355179223814857106405285007997547692546378757062999581657867188420995770650565521377874333085963123444258953052751461206977615079511435862879678439081175536265576977106865074099512897235100538241196445815568291377846656352979228098911566675956525644182645608178603837172227838896725425605719942300037650526231486881066037397866942013838296769284745527778439272995067231492069369130289154753132313883294398593507873555667211005422003204156154859031529462152953119957597195735953686798871131148255050140450845034240095305094449911578598539658855704158240221809528010179414493499583473568873253067921639513996596738275817909624857593693291980841303291145613566466575233283651420134915764961372875933822262953420444548349180436583183291944875599477240814774580187144637965487250578134990402443365677985388481961492444981994523034245619781853365476552719460960795929666883665704293897310201276011658074359194189359660792496027472226428571547971602259808697441435358578480589837766911684200275636889192254762678512597000452676191374475932796663842865744658264924913771676415404179920096074751516422872997665425047457428327276230059296132722787915300105002019006293320082955378715908263653377755031155794063450515731009402407584683132870206376994025920790298591144213659942668622062191441346200098342943955169522532574271644954360217472458521489671859465232568419404182043966092211744372699797375966048010775453444600153524772238401414789562651410289808994960533132759532092895779406940925252906166612153699850759933762897947175972147868784008320247586210378556711332739463277940255289047962323306946068381887446046387745247925675240182981190836264964640612069909458682443392729946084099312047752966806439331403663934969942958022237945205992581178803606156982034385347182766573351768749665172549908638337611953199808161937885366709285043276595726484068138091188914698151703122773726725261370542355162118164302728812259192476428938730724109825922331973256105091200551566581350508061922762910078528219869913214146575557249199263634241165352226570749618907050553115468306669184485910269806225894530809823102279231750061652042560772530576713148647858705369649642907780603247428680176236527220826640665659902650188140474762163503557640566711903907798932853656216227739411210513756695569391593763704981001125
Source
functools lru_cache
As #alex suggested, you could use a generator function to do this sequentially instead of recursively.
Here's the equivalent of the code in your question:
def fib(n):
def fibseq(n):
""" Iteratively return the first n Fibonacci numbers, starting from 0. """
a, b = 0, 1
for _ in xrange(n):
yield a
a, b = b, a + b
return sum(v for v in fibseq(n))
print format(fib(100000), ',d') # -> no recursion depth error
Edit: 6 years later I realized my "Use generators" was flippant and didn't answer the question. My apologies.
I guess my first question would be: do you really need to change the recursion limit? If not, then perhaps my or any of the other answers that don't deal with changing the recursion limit will apply. Otherwise, as noted, override the recursion limit using sys.getrecursionlimit(n).
Use generators?
def fib():
a, b = 0, 1
while True:
yield a
a, b = b, a + b
fibs = fib() #seems to be the only way to get the following line to work is to
#assign the infinite generator to a variable
f = [fibs.next() for x in xrange(1001)]
for num in f:
print num
Above fib() function adapted from Introduction to Python Generators.
Many recommend that increasing recursion limit is a good solution however it is not because there will be always limit. Instead use an iterative solution.
def fib(n):
a,b = 1,1
for i in range(n-1):
a,b = b,a+b
return a
print fib(5)
I wanted to give you an example for using memoization to compute Fibonacci as this will allow you to compute significantly larger numbers using recursion:
cache = {}
def fib_dp(n):
if n in cache:
return cache[n]
if n == 0: return 0
elif n == 1: return 1
else:
value = fib_dp(n-1) + fib_dp(n-2)
cache[n] = value
return value
print(fib_dp(998))
This is still recursive, but uses a simple hashtable that allows the reuse of previously calculated Fibonacci numbers instead of doing them again.
import sys
sys.setrecursionlimit(1500)
def fib(n, sum):
if n < 1:
return sum
else:
return fib(n-1, sum+n)
c = 998
print(fib(c, 0))
We could also use a variation of dynamic programming bottom up approach
def fib_bottom_up(n):
bottom_up = [None] * (n+1)
bottom_up[0] = 1
bottom_up[1] = 1
for i in range(2, n+1):
bottom_up[i] = bottom_up[i-1] + bottom_up[i-2]
return bottom_up[n]
print(fib_bottom_up(20000))
I'm not sure I'm repeating someone but some time ago some good soul wrote Y-operator for recursively called function like:
def tail_recursive(func):
y_operator = (lambda f: (lambda y: y(y))(lambda x: f(lambda *args: lambda: x(x)(*args))))(func)
def wrap_func_tail(*args):
out = y_operator(*args)
while callable(out): out = out()
return out
return wrap_func_tail
and then recursive function needs form:
def my_recursive_func(g):
def wrapped(some_arg, acc):
if <condition>: return acc
return g(some_arg, acc)
return wrapped
# and finally you call it in code
(tail_recursive(my_recursive_func))(some_arg, acc)
for Fibonacci numbers your function looks like this:
def fib(g):
def wrapped(n_1, n_2, n):
if n == 0: return n_1
return g(n_2, n_1 + n_2, n-1)
return wrapped
print((tail_recursive(fib))(0, 1, 1000000))
output:
..684684301719893411568996526838242546875
(actually tones of digits)
N=3
pre_calc=["-1" for i in range (N+2)]
def calc(i) :
if(pre_calc[i] =="-1"):
if i==0:
pre_calc[i] ="a[0]"
elif i==N+1:
pre_calc[i]= "a[N+1]"
else:
pre_calc[i] ="("+str(calc(i-1))+"+"+str(calc(i+1))+")/2-c["+str(i)+"]"
return pre_calc[i] ;
ans=calc(1)
print (ans)
I am solving recurrence a[i] =(a[i-1]+a[i+1])/2-c[i], where c[i], a[0] and a[N+1]. That is problem 1047 on Timus.
So, to understand that recurrence I decided to write a program that would output an expression of a[1] in terms of a[0],a[N+1] and c[i].
I did.
Bit it absolutely doesn't works!
I want to know why stack depth limit is exceed even if N is two.
calc(1) calls calc(2) (i + 1 call), which calls calc(1) (i - 1 call), which calls calc(2), which calls calc(1), which calls calc(2) ...
Recursive methods,and funcs are very very dangerous for the program if you rewrite calc function as unrecursive style, you get rid of this problem.
don't never use recursive methods when you have not to use
Edith:
if you are sure the max depth of func and the max depth value isn't very high (lower than depth limit), of course you can use it func. but if you don't know max depth, don't use it because it func can kill your program.
for example recursive factorial func too dangerous because max depth of this func can higher than dept limit.
i just wrote this function and got error from the interpreter "RecursionError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison"
is it possible to use yield in this recursion?
def multiplyer(fir, sec):
if(sec==1):
return fir
else:
return fir+multiplyer(fir, sec-1)
print(multiplyer(5, 2983))
There is no need to use yield at all (and as far as I know, it will not work anyway). Your multiplayer function is simply equivalent to:
def multiplayer(fir,sec):
return fir*sec
furthermore yield will not make much difference since it will still result in a recursion error: after all you will still perform calls 2983 deep (which is usually too much for the call stack). Python also does not support tail recursion optimization (TRO).
yield is used when you want use a generator. A generator produces several (it can be zero, one or more) values. Here however you need a single value (and you need it immediately). Say that you however use yield like:
def multiplyer(fir, sec):
if(sec==1):
yield fir
else:
yield fir+next(multiplyer(fir, sec-1))
print(next(multiplyer(5, 2983)))
it will not make any difference: you will still do the recursion and reach the bound.
You run out of stack space since you let the function call itself 2983 times, which means you store that number of return addresses and arguments on the stack, which is just not reasonable.
If your requirement is to use recursion, you can reduce the recursion depth to O(logn) order by doing this:
def multiplyer(fir, sec):
if sec==1:
return fir
elif sec==0:
return 0
else:
return multiplyer(fir, sec//2) + multiplyer(fir, (sec+1)//2)
print(multiplyer(5, 2983))
Or more efficiently, also reducing the number of recursive calls to O(logn) order:
def multiplyer(fir, sec):
if sec==0:
return 0
elif sec%2 == 0:
return 2 * multiplyer(fir, sec//2)
else:
return fir + 2 * multiplyer(fir, sec//2)
print(multiplyer(5, 2983))
When dealing with recursion, you can check the maximum allowed recursion depth like:
import sys
sys.getrecursionlimit()
and the nice thing is you can also set it:
sys.setrecursionlimit(3000)
However, this says nothing about your code or if it is optimal for what you are trying to achieve.
Don't use recursion in Python where iteration will do. Generators optimize for memory usage, nothing else. They are slower than the alternatives, and do not provide any workarounds for the global recursion limit (which is actually a limit on the size of the call stack; non-recursive calls count towards the limit as well).
# Just demonstrating the conversion from recursion to iteration.
# fir * sec would be the most efficient solution.
def multiplyer(fir, sec):
rv = 0
while sec > 0:
rv += fir
sec -= 1
return rv