What happens when the function is called inside itself (Python) [duplicate] - python

Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
One of the topics that seems to come up regularly on mailing lists and online discussions is the merits (or lack thereof) of doing a Computer Science Degree. An argument that seems to come up time and again for the negative party is that they have been coding for some number of years and they have never used recursion.
So the question is:
What is recursion?
When would I use recursion?
Why don't people use recursion?

There are a number of good explanations of recursion in this thread, this answer is about why you shouldn't use it in most languages.* In the majority of major imperative language implementations (i.e. every major implementation of C, C++, Basic, Python, Ruby,Java, and C#) iteration is vastly preferable to recursion.
To see why, walk through the steps that the above languages use to call a function:
space is carved out on the stack for the function's arguments and local variables
the function's arguments are copied into this new space
control jumps to the function
the function's code runs
the function's result is copied into a return value
the stack is rewound to its previous position
control jumps back to where the function was called
Doing all of these steps takes time, usually a little bit more than it takes to iterate through a loop. However, the real problem is in step #1. When many programs start, they allocate a single chunk of memory for their stack, and when they run out of that memory (often, but not always due to recursion), the program crashes due to a stack overflow.
So in these languages recursion is slower and it makes you vulnerable to crashing. There are still some arguments for using it though. In general, code written recursively is shorter and a bit more elegant, once you know how to read it.
There is a technique that language implementers can use called tail call optimization which can eliminate some classes of stack overflow. Put succinctly: if a function's return expression is simply the result of a function call, then you don't need to add a new level onto the stack, you can reuse the current one for the function being called. Regrettably, few imperative language-implementations have tail-call optimization built in.
* I love recursion. My favorite static language doesn't use loops at all, recursion is the only way to do something repeatedly. I just don't think that recursion is generally a good idea in languages that aren't tuned for it.
** By the way Mario, the typical name for your ArrangeString function is "join", and I'd be surprised if your language of choice doesn't already have an implementation of it.

Simple english example of recursion.
A child couldn't sleep, so her mother told her a story about a little frog,
who couldn't sleep, so the frog's mother told her a story about a little bear,
who couldn't sleep, so the bear's mother told her a story about a little weasel...
who fell asleep.
...and the little bear fell asleep;
...and the little frog fell asleep;
...and the child fell asleep.

In the most basic computer science sense, recursion is a function that calls itself. Say you have a linked list structure:
struct Node {
Node* next;
};
And you want to find out how long a linked list is you can do this with recursion:
int length(const Node* list) {
if (!list->next) {
return 1;
} else {
return 1 + length(list->next);
}
}
(This could of course be done with a for loop as well, but is useful as an illustration of the concept)

Whenever a function calls itself, creating a loop, then that's recursion. As with anything there are good uses and bad uses for recursion.
The most simple example is tail recursion where the very last line of the function is a call to itself:
int FloorByTen(int num)
{
if (num % 10 == 0)
return num;
else
return FloorByTen(num-1);
}
However, this is a lame, almost pointless example because it can easily be replaced by more efficient iteration. After all, recursion suffers from function call overhead, which in the example above could be substantial compared to the operation inside the function itself.
So the whole reason to do recursion rather than iteration should be to take advantage of the call stack to do some clever stuff. For example, if you call a function multiple times with different parameters inside the same loop then that's a way to accomplish branching. A classic example is the Sierpinski triangle.
You can draw one of those very simply with recursion, where the call stack branches in 3 directions:
private void BuildVertices(double x, double y, double len)
{
if (len > 0.002)
{
mesh.Positions.Add(new Point3D(x, y + len, -len));
mesh.Positions.Add(new Point3D(x - len, y - len, -len));
mesh.Positions.Add(new Point3D(x + len, y - len, -len));
len *= 0.5;
BuildVertices(x, y + len, len);
BuildVertices(x - len, y - len, len);
BuildVertices(x + len, y - len, len);
}
}
If you attempt to do the same thing with iteration I think you'll find it takes a lot more code to accomplish.
Other common use cases might include traversing hierarchies, e.g. website crawlers, directory comparisons, etc.
Conclusion
In practical terms, recursion makes the most sense whenever you need iterative branching.

Recursion is a method of solving problems based on the divide and conquer mentality.
The basic idea is that you take the original problem and divide it into smaller (more easily solved) instances of itself, solve those smaller instances (usually by using the same algorithm again) and then reassemble them into the final solution.
The canonical example is a routine to generate the Factorial of n. The Factorial of n is calculated by multiplying all of the numbers between 1 and n. An iterative solution in C# looks like this:
public int Fact(int n)
{
int fact = 1;
for( int i = 2; i <= n; i++)
{
fact = fact * i;
}
return fact;
}
There's nothing surprising about the iterative solution and it should make sense to anyone familiar with C#.
The recursive solution is found by recognising that the nth Factorial is n * Fact(n-1). Or to put it another way, if you know what a particular Factorial number is you can calculate the next one. Here is the recursive solution in C#:
public int FactRec(int n)
{
if( n < 2 )
{
return 1;
}
return n * FactRec( n - 1 );
}
The first part of this function is known as a Base Case (or sometimes Guard Clause) and is what prevents the algorithm from running forever. It just returns the value 1 whenever the function is called with a value of 1 or less. The second part is more interesting and is known as the Recursive Step. Here we call the same method with a slightly modified parameter (we decrement it by 1) and then multiply the result with our copy of n.
When first encountered this can be kind of confusing so it's instructive to examine how it works when run. Imagine that we call FactRec(5). We enter the routine, are not picked up by the base case and so we end up like this:
// In FactRec(5)
return 5 * FactRec( 5 - 1 );
// which is
return 5 * FactRec(4);
If we re-enter the method with the parameter 4 we are again not stopped by the guard clause and so we end up at:
// In FactRec(4)
return 4 * FactRec(3);
If we substitute this return value into the return value above we get
// In FactRec(5)
return 5 * (4 * FactRec(3));
This should give you a clue as to how the final solution is arrived at so we'll fast track and show each step on the way down:
return 5 * (4 * FactRec(3));
return 5 * (4 * (3 * FactRec(2)));
return 5 * (4 * (3 * (2 * FactRec(1))));
return 5 * (4 * (3 * (2 * (1))));
That final substitution happens when the base case is triggered. At this point we have a simple algrebraic formula to solve which equates directly to the definition of Factorials in the first place.
It's instructive to note that every call into the method results in either a base case being triggered or a call to the same method where the parameters are closer to a base case (often called a recursive call). If this is not the case then the method will run forever.

Recursion is solving a problem with a function that calls itself. A good example of this is a factorial function. Factorial is a math problem where factorial of 5, for example, is 5 * 4 * 3 * 2 * 1. This function solves this in C# for positive integers (not tested - there may be a bug).
public int Factorial(int n)
{
if (n <= 1)
return 1;
return n * Factorial(n - 1);
}

Recursion refers to a method which solves a problem by solving a smaller version of the problem and then using that result plus some other computation to formulate the answer to the original problem. Often times, in the process of solving the smaller version, the method will solve a yet smaller version of the problem, and so on, until it reaches a "base case" which is trivial to solve.
For instance, to calculate a factorial for the number X, one can represent it as X times the factorial of X-1. Thus, the method "recurses" to find the factorial of X-1, and then multiplies whatever it got by X to give a final answer. Of course, to find the factorial of X-1, it'll first calculate the factorial of X-2, and so on. The base case would be when X is 0 or 1, in which case it knows to return 1 since 0! = 1! = 1.

Consider an old, well known problem:
In mathematics, the greatest common divisor (gcd) … of two or more non-zero integers, is the largest positive integer that divides the numbers without a remainder.
The definition of gcd is surprisingly simple:
where mod is the modulo operator (that is, the remainder after integer division).
In English, this definition says the greatest common divisor of any number and zero is that number, and the greatest common divisor of two numbers m and n is the greatest common divisor of n and the remainder after dividing m by n.
If you'd like to know why this works, see the Wikipedia article on the Euclidean algorithm.
Let's compute gcd(10, 8) as an example. Each step is equal to the one just before it:
gcd(10, 8)
gcd(10, 10 mod 8)
gcd(8, 2)
gcd(8, 8 mod 2)
gcd(2, 0)
2
In the first step, 8 does not equal zero, so the second part of the definition applies. 10 mod 8 = 2 because 8 goes into 10 once with a remainder of 2. At step 3, the second part applies again, but this time 8 mod 2 = 0 because 2 divides 8 with no remainder. At step 5, the second argument is 0, so the answer is 2.
Did you notice that gcd appears on both the left and right sides of the equals sign? A mathematician would say this definition is recursive because the expression you're defining recurs inside its definition.
Recursive definitions tend to be elegant. For example, a recursive definition for the sum of a list is
sum l =
if empty(l)
return 0
else
return head(l) + sum(tail(l))
where head is the first element in a list and tail is the rest of the list. Note that sum recurs inside its definition at the end.
Maybe you'd prefer the maximum value in a list instead:
max l =
if empty(l)
error
elsif length(l) = 1
return head(l)
else
tailmax = max(tail(l))
if head(l) > tailmax
return head(l)
else
return tailmax
You might define multiplication of non-negative integers recursively to turn it into a series of additions:
a * b =
if b = 0
return 0
else
return a + (a * (b - 1))
If that bit about transforming multiplication into a series of additions doesn't make sense, try expanding a few simple examples to see how it works.
Merge sort has a lovely recursive definition:
sort(l) =
if empty(l) or length(l) = 1
return l
else
(left,right) = split l
return merge(sort(left), sort(right))
Recursive definitions are all around if you know what to look for. Notice how all of these definitions have very simple base cases, e.g., gcd(m, 0) = m. The recursive cases whittle away at the problem to get down to the easy answers.
With this understanding, you can now appreciate the other algorithms in Wikipedia's article on recursion!

A function that calls itself
When a function can be (easily) decomposed into a simple operation plus the same function on some smaller portion of the problem. I should say, rather, that this makes it a good candidate for recursion.
They do!
The canonical example is the factorial which looks like:
int fact(int a)
{
if(a==1)
return 1;
return a*fact(a-1);
}
In general, recursion isn't necessarily fast (function call overhead tends to be high because recursive functions tend to be small, see above) and can suffer from some problems (stack overflow anyone?). Some say they tend to be hard to get 'right' in non-trivial cases but I don't really buy into that. In some situations, recursion makes the most sense and is the most elegant and clear way to write a particular function. It should be noted that some languages favor recursive solutions and optimize them much more (LISP comes to mind).

A recursive function is one which calls itself. The most common reason I've found to use it is traversing a tree structure. For example, if I have a TreeView with checkboxes (think installation of a new program, "choose features to install" page), I might want a "check all" button which would be something like this (pseudocode):
function cmdCheckAllClick {
checkRecursively(TreeView1.RootNode);
}
function checkRecursively(Node n) {
n.Checked = True;
foreach ( n.Children as child ) {
checkRecursively(child);
}
}
So you can see that the checkRecursively first checks the node which it is passed, then calls itself for each of that node's children.
You do need to be a bit careful with recursion. If you get into an infinite recursive loop, you will get a Stack Overflow exception :)
I can't think of a reason why people shouldn't use it, when appropriate. It is useful in some circumstances, and not in others.
I think that because it's an interesting technique, some coders perhaps end up using it more often than they should, without real justification. This has given recursion a bad name in some circles.

Recursion is an expression directly or indirectly referencing itself.
Consider recursive acronyms as a simple example:
GNU stands for GNU's Not Unix
PHP stands for PHP: Hypertext Preprocessor
YAML stands for YAML Ain't Markup Language
WINE stands for Wine Is Not an Emulator
VISA stands for Visa International Service Association
More examples on Wikipedia

Recursion works best with what I like to call "fractal problems", where you're dealing with a big thing that's made of smaller versions of that big thing, each of which is an even smaller version of the big thing, and so on. If you ever have to traverse or search through something like a tree or nested identical structures, you've got a problem that might be a good candidate for recursion.
People avoid recursion for a number of reasons:
Most people (myself included) cut their programming teeth on procedural or object-oriented programming as opposed to functional programming. To such people, the iterative approach (typically using loops) feels more natural.
Those of us who cut our programming teeth on procedural or object-oriented programming have often been told to avoid recursion because it's error prone.
We're often told that recursion is slow. Calling and returning from a routine repeatedly involves a lot of stack pushing and popping, which is slower than looping. I think some languages handle this better than others, and those languages are most likely not those where the dominant paradigm is procedural or object-oriented.
For at least a couple of programming languages I've used, I remember hearing recommendations not to use recursion if it gets beyond a certain depth because its stack isn't that deep.

A recursive statement is one in which you define the process of what to do next as a combination of the inputs and what you have already done.
For example, take factorial:
factorial(6) = 6*5*4*3*2*1
But it's easy to see factorial(6) also is:
6 * factorial(5) = 6*(5*4*3*2*1).
So generally:
factorial(n) = n*factorial(n-1)
Of course, the tricky thing about recursion is that if you want to define things in terms of what you have already done, there needs to be some place to start.
In this example, we just make a special case by defining factorial(1) = 1.
Now we see it from the bottom up:
factorial(6) = 6*factorial(5)
= 6*5*factorial(4)
= 6*5*4*factorial(3) = 6*5*4*3*factorial(2) = 6*5*4*3*2*factorial(1) = 6*5*4*3*2*1
Since we defined factorial(1) = 1, we reach the "bottom".
Generally speaking, recursive procedures have two parts:
1) The recursive part, which defines some procedure in terms of new inputs combined with what you've "already done" via the same procedure. (i.e. factorial(n) = n*factorial(n-1))
2) A base part, which makes sure that the process doesn't repeat forever by giving it some place to start (i.e. factorial(1) = 1)
It can be a bit confusing to get your head around at first, but just look at a bunch of examples and it should all come together. If you want a much deeper understanding of the concept, study mathematical induction. Also, be aware that some languages optimize for recursive calls while others do not. It's pretty easy to make insanely slow recursive functions if you're not careful, but there are also techniques to make them performant in most cases.
Hope this helps...

I like this definition:
In recursion, a routine solves a small part of a problem itself, divides the problem into smaller pieces, and then calls itself to solve each of the smaller pieces.
I also like Steve McConnells discussion of recursion in Code Complete where he criticises the examples used in Computer Science books on Recursion.
Don't use recursion for factorials or Fibonacci numbers
One problem with
computer-science textbooks is that
they present silly examples of
recursion. The typical examples are
computing a factorial or computing a
Fibonacci sequence. Recursion is a
powerful tool, and it's really dumb to
use it in either of those cases. If a
programmer who worked for me used
recursion to compute a factorial, I'd
hire someone else.
I thought this was a very interesting point to raise and may be a reason why recursion is often misunderstood.
EDIT:
This was not a dig at Dav's answer - I had not seen that reply when I posted this

1.)
A method is recursive if it can call itself; either directly:
void f() {
... f() ...
}
or indirectly:
void f() {
... g() ...
}
void g() {
... f() ...
}
2.) When to use recursion
Q: Does using recursion usually make your code faster?
A: No.
Q: Does using recursion usually use less memory?
A: No.
Q: Then why use recursion?
A: It sometimes makes your code much simpler!
3.) People use recursion only when it is very complex to write iterative code. For example, tree traversal techniques like preorder, postorder can be made both iterative and recursive. But usually we use recursive because of its simplicity.

Here's a simple example: how many elements in a set. (there are better ways to count things, but this is a nice simple recursive example.)
First, we need two rules:
if the set is empty, the count of items in the set is zero (duh!).
if the set is not empty, the count is one plus the number of items in the set after one item is removed.
Suppose you have a set like this: [x x x]. let's count how many items there are.
the set is [x x x] which is not empty, so we apply rule 2. the number of items is one plus the number of items in [x x] (i.e. we removed an item).
the set is [x x], so we apply rule 2 again: one + number of items in [x].
the set is [x], which still matches rule 2: one + number of items in [].
Now the set is [], which matches rule 1: the count is zero!
Now that we know the answer in step 4 (0), we can solve step 3 (1 + 0)
Likewise, now that we know the answer in step 3 (1), we can solve step 2 (1 + 1)
And finally now that we know the answer in step 2 (2), we can solve step 1 (1 + 2) and get the count of items in [x x x], which is 3. Hooray!
We can represent this as:
count of [x x x] = 1 + count of [x x]
= 1 + (1 + count of [x])
= 1 + (1 + (1 + count of []))
= 1 + (1 + (1 + 0)))
= 1 + (1 + (1))
= 1 + (2)
= 3
When applying a recursive solution, you usually have at least 2 rules:
the basis, the simple case which states what happens when you have "used up" all of your data. This is usually some variation of "if you are out of data to process, your answer is X"
the recursive rule, which states what happens if you still have data. This is usually some kind of rule that says "do something to make your data set smaller, and reapply your rules to the smaller data set."
If we translate the above to pseudocode, we get:
numberOfItems(set)
if set is empty
return 0
else
remove 1 item from set
return 1 + numberOfItems(set)
There's a lot more useful examples (traversing a tree, for example) which I'm sure other people will cover.

Well, that's a pretty decent definition you have. And wikipedia has a good definition too. So I'll add another (probably worse) definition for you.
When people refer to "recursion", they're usually talking about a function they've written which calls itself repeatedly until it is done with its work. Recursion can be helpful when traversing hierarchies in data structures.

An example: A recursive definition of a staircase is:
A staircase consists of:
- a single step and a staircase (recursion)
- or only a single step (termination)

To recurse on a solved problem: do nothing, you're done.
To recurse on an open problem: do the next step, then recurse on the rest.

In plain English:
Assume you can do 3 things:
Take one apple
Write down tally marks
Count tally marks
You have a lot of apples in front of you on a table and you want to know how many apples there are.
start
Is the table empty?
yes: Count the tally marks and cheer like it's your birthday!
no: Take 1 apple and put it aside
Write down a tally mark
goto start
The process of repeating the same thing till you are done is called recursion.
I hope this is the "plain english" answer you are looking for!

A recursive function is a function that contains a call to itself. A recursive struct is a struct that contains an instance of itself. You can combine the two as a recursive class. The key part of a recursive item is that it contains an instance/call of itself.
Consider two mirrors facing each other. We've seen the neat infinity effect they make. Each reflection is an instance of a mirror, which is contained within another instance of a mirror, etc. The mirror containing a reflection of itself is recursion.
A binary search tree is a good programming example of recursion. The structure is recursive with each Node containing 2 instances of a Node. Functions to work on a binary search tree are also recursive.

This is an old question, but I want to add an answer from logistical point of view (i.e not from algorithm correctness point of view or performance point of view).
I use Java for work, and Java doesn't support nested function. As such, if I want to do recursion, I might have to define an external function (which exists only because my code bumps against Java's bureaucratic rule), or I might have to refactor the code altogether (which I really hate to do).
Thus, I often avoid recursion, and use stack operation instead, because recursion itself is essentially a stack operation.

You want to use it anytime you have a tree structure. It is very useful in reading XML.

Recursion as it applies to programming is basically calling a function from inside its own definition (inside itself), with different parameters so as to accomplish a task.

"If I have a hammer, make everything look like a nail."
Recursion is a problem-solving strategy for huge problems, where at every step just, "turn 2 small things into one bigger thing," each time with the same hammer.
Example
Suppose your desk is covered with a disorganized mess of 1024 papers. How do you make one neat, clean stack of papers from the mess, using recursion?
Divide: Spread all the sheets out, so you have just one sheet in each "stack".
Conquer:
Go around, putting each sheet on top of one other sheet. You now have stacks of 2.
Go around, putting each 2-stack on top of another 2-stack. You now have stacks of 4.
Go around, putting each 4-stack on top of another 4-stack. You now have stacks of 8.
... on and on ...
You now have one huge stack of 1024 sheets!
Notice that this is pretty intuitive, aside from counting everything (which isn't strictly necessary). You might not go all the way down to 1-sheet stacks, in reality, but you could and it would still work. The important part is the hammer: With your arms, you can always put one stack on top of the other to make a bigger stack, and it doesn't matter (within reason) how big either stack is.

Recursion is the process where a method call iself to be able to perform a certain task. It reduces redundency of code. Most recurssive functions or methods must have a condifiton to break the recussive call i.e. stop it from calling itself if a condition is met - this prevents the creating of an infinite loop. Not all functions are suited to be used recursively.

hey, sorry if my opinion agrees with someone, I'm just trying to explain recursion in plain english.
suppose you have three managers - Jack, John and Morgan.
Jack manages 2 programmers, John - 3, and Morgan - 5.
you are going to give every manager 300$ and want to know what would it cost.
The answer is obvious - but what if 2 of Morgan-s employees are also managers?
HERE comes the recursion.
you start from the top of the hierarchy. the summery cost is 0$.
you start with Jack,
Then check if he has any managers as employees. if you find any of them are, check if they have any managers as employees and so on. Add 300$ to the summery cost every time you find a manager.
when you are finished with Jack, go to John, his employees and then to Morgan.
You'll never know, how much cycles will you go before getting an answer, though you know how many managers you have and how many Budget can you spend.
Recursion is a tree, with branches and leaves, called parents and children respectively.
When you use a recursion algorithm, you more or less consciously are building a tree from the data.

In plain English, recursion means to repeat someting again and again.
In programming one example is of calling the function within itself .
Look on the following example of calculating factorial of a number:
public int fact(int n)
{
if (n==0) return 1;
else return n*fact(n-1)
}

Any algorithm exhibits structural recursion on a datatype if basically consists of a switch-statement with a case for each case of the datatype.
for example, when you are working on a type
tree = null
| leaf(value:integer)
| node(left: tree, right:tree)
a structural recursive algorithm would have the form
function computeSomething(x : tree) =
if x is null: base case
if x is leaf: do something with x.value
if x is node: do something with x.left,
do something with x.right,
combine the results
this is really the most obvious way to write any algorith that works on a data structure.
now, when you look at the integers (well, the natural numbers) as defined using the Peano axioms
integer = 0 | succ(integer)
you see that a structural recursive algorithm on integers looks like this
function computeSomething(x : integer) =
if x is 0 : base case
if x is succ(prev) : do something with prev
the too-well-known factorial function is about the most trivial example of
this form.

function call itself or use its own definition.

Related

Looping or Recursion

I wrote two programs to calculate the factorial of a number.
1:
import time
x = int(input('>'))
t1 = time.time()
fact=1
if x==0:
print('undefined')
elif x==1:
print(1)
else:
while x!=1:
fact *= x
x -= 1
print(fact)
print(time.time()-t1)
2:
import time
def fact(n):
if n==0:
return 'undefined'
elif n==1:
return 1
else:
return n*fact(n-1)
x = int(input('>'))
t1 = time.time()
print(fact(x))
t = time.time()-t1
print(t)
The average runtime of the second program was less than the first one. Now my question is which one is really better than the other and what else we use method 2 for (don't want any code examples). And I'm sorry if the question was asked before (which it probably was), I searched for a while but was not able to find it.
Better is naturally a subjective term. As mentioned in the comments, both run in O(n) time in terms of runtime complexity. However, depending on the details of the language, recursive functions often take up more space in memory.
Specifically, since you seem to be using Python, each recursive call requires a new function call frame, keeping track of that function call's variables. This takes up significantly more space than a simple loop while taking effectively the same amount of time. In fact, to limit your use of deep recursion, Python by default has a recursion depth limit of 1000; aka, you would not be able to calculate the factorial of numbers above 1000 this way.
Generally speaking, which is the better option depends on the language. And loops will almost always take up less if not equal space to a recursive function. However, this doesn't mean that recursion is useless! When it comes to a simple example like the factorial function, recursion is not at all necessary. However when you are building complex data structures or algorithms, recursion is occasionally necessary if not incredibly cleaner in order to write your solution.
Ultimately Recursion and Loops are nearly the same. I prefer to use recursion when
The implementation of the recursive solutions is much simpler than the iterative solution
I can be sure that the recursion won't cause a stack overflow by going too deep into the callstack
Tree Traversal, Graph Traversal, and Sorting are all good examples of places that recursion is likely your best option

Multiplication Recursion

I am having a bit of trouble understanding recursion, so any help/understanding would be much appreciated. I am trying to write a code where two non-numbers will multiply. Sounds simple, although there is to be NO ( *, +, or - ) operators used except within two initial functions as seen below. These are used to add 1 too n by n_2 times up until the value of n_2.
Ex: 3 + 4 > 3 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 7
n = int(input())
n_2 = int(input())
def inc(n):
return n + 1
def dec(n):
return n - 1
There then needs to be an add function that calls back onto the two previous functions, again you cannot use ( *, +, or - ). Then using this add function to "multiply" the numbers in a seperate function by basically adding n by n_2 number of times using the add function.
Thank you!
Update: People are commenting that I am asking this to get homework answers/cheat. I am asking this to understand recursion and to get help on a difficult problem. You do not need answer the problem with the full code, I am just asking for a helping hand to guide me on understanding the topic. Specifically how recursion works in general, with a little bit of guidance on the problem. The problem is and example of what I am looking to solve using recursion.
If you're not used to recursion as a concept, it might help to start with an iterative solution using the tools you have. You've already realised that you can express 3+4 as 3+1+1+1+1, and one way to write that in Python is to use a loop:
def iterative_add(n, n_2):
for _ in range(n_2):
n = inc(n)
return n
Now, we need to turn this into a recursive solution. The defining characteristic of a recursive solution is that instead of figuring out how many times to repeat something, you do a little bit of the problem and call yourself again to do the rest of it. Here, the obvious little bit we can do is to call inc once, and then we call the same function again to do the next inc - so we start with something like this:
def recursive_add(n, n_2):
return recursive_add(inc(n), n_2)
This will obviously keep going forever, and so we need to think about how we tell it to stop. In the iterative version, we stop when we've called inc exactly n_2 times, but here we don't have any obvious way to keep track of how many times we've called it. One nice way is to think about the breakdown 3+4 = 3+1+1+1+1 and realise that once we've added the first 1, the remaining problem is (3+1)+(1+1+1) = 4+3. So we decrement n_2 each time, effectively moving a '1' from the right-hand brackets over to the left at each step, so that next one will be ((3+1)+1) + (1+1). We can stop when the right hand brackets are empty.
In Python, we can write this as:
def recursive_add(n, n_2):
if n_2 == 0:
return n
return recursive_add(inc(n), dec(n_2))
It is worth noting that the way recursion works is to "build up" the expression ((((3+1)+1)+1)+1) in this step-by-step way, and then starts evaluating it from the innermost brackets out. If you can wrap your head around that concept, you should be able to easily write a recursive multiplication solution the same way.

Is this function recursive even though it doesn't call itself?

from pythonds.basic.stack import Stack
rStack = Stack()
def toStr(n,base):
convertString = "0123456789ABCDEF"
while n > 0:
if n < base:
rStack.push(convertString[n])
else:
rStack.push(convertString[n % base])
n = n // base
res = ""
while not rStack.isEmpty():
res = res + str(rStack.pop())
return res
print(toStr(1345,2))
I'm referring to this tutorial and also pasted the code above. The tutorial says the function is recursive but I don't see a recursive call anywhere, just a while loop. What am I missing?
You are right that this particular function is not recursive. However, the context is, that on the previous slide there was a recursive function, and in this one they want to show a glimpse of how it behaves internally. They later say:
The previous example [i.e. the one in question - B.] gives us some insight into how Python implements a recursive function call.
So, yes, the title is misleading, it should be rather Expanding a recursive function or Imitating recursive function behavior with a stack or something like this.
One may say that this function employs a recursive approach/strategy in some sense, to the problem being solved, but is not recursive itself.
A recursive algorithm, by definition, is a method where the solution to a problem depends on solutions to smaller instances of the same problem.
Here, the problem is to convert a number to a string in a given notation.
The "stockpiling" of data the function does actually looks like this:
push(d1)
push(d2)
...
push(dn-1)
push(dn)
res+=pop(dn)
res+=pop(dn-1)
...
res+=pop(d2)
res+=pop(d1)
which is effectively:
def pushpop():
push(dx)
pushpop(dx+1...dn)
res+=pop(dx)
I.e. a step that processes a specific chunk of data encloses all the steps that process the rest of the data (with each chunk processed in the same way).
It can be argued if the function is recursive (since they tend to apply the term to subroutines in a narrower sense), but the algorithm it implements definitely is.
For you to better feel the difference, here's an iterative solution to the same problem:
def toStr(n,base):
charmap = "0123456789ABCDEF"
res=''
while n > 0:
res = charmap[n % base] + res
n = n // base
return res
As you can see, this method has much lower memory footprint as it doesn't stockpile tasks. This is the difference: an iterative algorithm performs each step using the same instance of the state by mutating it while a recursive one creates a new instance for each step, necessarily stockpiling them if the old ones are still needed.
Because you're using a stack structure.
If you consider how function calling is implemented, recursion is essentially an easy way to get the compiler to manage a stack of invocations for you.
This function does all the stack handling manually, but it is still conceptually a recursive function, just one where the stack management is done manually instead of letting the compiler do it.

Get length of list in Python using recursion

I am trying to calculate the length of a list. When I run it on cmd, I get:
RuntimeError: maximum recursion depth exceeded in comparison
I don't think there's anything wrong with my code:
def len_recursive(list):
if list == []:
return 0
else:
return 1 + len_recursive(list[1:])
Don't use recursion unless you can predict that it is not too deep. Python has quite small limit on recursion depth.
If you insist on recursion, the efficient way is:
def len_recursive(lst):
if not lst:
return 0
return 1 + len_recursive(lst[1::2]) + len_recursive(lst[2::2])
The recursion depth in Python is limited, but can be increased as shown in this post. If Python had support for the tail call optimization, this solution would work for arbitrary-length lists:
def len_recursive(lst):
def loop(lst, acc):
if not lst:
return acc
return loop(lst[1:], acc + 1)
return loop(lst, 0)
But as it is, you will have to use shorter lists and/or increase the maximum recursion depth allowed.
Of course, no one would use this implementation in real life (instead using the len() built-in function), I'm guessing this is an academic example of recursion, but even so the best approach here would be to use iteration, as shown in #poke's answer.
As others have explained, there are two problems with your function:
It's not tail-recursive, so it can only handle lists as long as sys.getrecursionlimit.
Even if it were tail-recursive, Python doesn't do tail recursion optimization.
The first is easy to solve. For example, see Óscar López's answer.
The second is hard to solve, but not impossible. One approach is to use coroutines (built on generators) instead of subroutines. Another is to not actually call the function recursively, but instead return a function with the recursive result, and use a driver that applies the results. See Tail Recursion in Python by Paul Butler for an example of how to implement the latter, but here's what it would look like in your case.
Start with Paul Butler's tail_rec function:
def tail_rec(fun):
def tail(fun):
a = fun
while callable(a):
a = a()
return a
return (lambda x: tail(fun(x)))
This doesn't work as a decorator for his case, because he has two mutually-recursive functions. But in your case, that's not an issue. So, using Óscar López's's version:
#tail_rec
def tail_len(lst):
def loop(lst, acc):
if not lst:
return acc
return lambda: loop(lst[1:], acc + 1)
return lambda: loop(lst, 0)
And now:
>>> print tail_len(range(10000))
10000
Tada.
If you actually wanted to use this, you might want to make tail_rec into a nicer decorator:
def tail_rec(fun):
def tail(fun):
a = fun
while callable(a):
a = a()
return a
return functools.update_wrapper(lambda x: tail(fun(x)), fun)
Imagine you're running this using a stack of paper. You want to count how many sheets you have. If someone gives you 10 sheets you take the first sheet, put it down on the table and grab the next sheet, placing it next to the first sheet. You do this 10 times and your desk is pretty full, but you've set out each sheet. You then start to count every page, recycling it as you count it up, 0 + 1 + 1 + ... => 10. This isn't the best way to count pages, but it mirrors the recursive approach and python's implementaion.
This works for small numbers of pages. Now imagine someone gives you 10000 sheets. Pretty soon there is no room on your desk to set out each page. This is essentially what the error message is telling you.
The Maximum Recursion depth is "how many sheets" can the table hold. Each time you call python needs to keep the "1 + result of recursive call" around so that when all the pages have been laid out it can come back and count them up. Unfortunately you're running out of space before the final counting-up occurs.
If you want to do this recursively to learn, since you're want to use len() in any reasonable situation, just use small lists, 25 should be fine.
Some systems could handle this for large lists if they support tail calls
Your exception message means that your method is called recursively too often, so it’s likely that your list is just too long to count the elements recursively like that. You could do it simply using a iterative solution though:
def len_iterative(lst):
length = 0
while lst:
length += 1
lst = lst[1:]
return length
Note that this will very likely still be a terrible solution as lst[1:] will keep creating copies of the list. So you will end up with len(lst) + 1 list instances (with lengths 0 to len(lst)). It is probably the best idea to just use the built-in len directly, but I guess it was an assignment.
Python isn't optimising tail recursion calls, so using such recursive algorythms isn't a good idea.
You can tweak stack with sys.setrecursionlimit(), but it's still not a good idea.

Unable to understand recursions and caching from Fibonacci code

I'm trying to understand recursions and caching much better and still I'm making interesting progress(I'm a bit slow at times). I'm having small problems understanding this code:
# Fibonacci recursive with result storage
class FibonacciStorage:
_storage = { 0:1, 1:1 }
#staticmethod
def _fib(number):
try: # is this already calculated
return FibonacciStorage._storage[number] #searches dict, and if value exists then return it
except KeyError:
result = FibonacciStorage._fib(number-1) + FibonacciStorage._fib(number-2) #this is the actual Fibonacci Formula
FibonacciStorage._storage[number] = result #adds result to dictionary
#print FibonacciStorage._storage #this shows the storage list growing with each iteration.
return result
#staticmethod
def fib(number): #first function, it has two asserts to basically make sure number is whole/positive and if its okay passes it to _fib(where the real work is done)
# only do the assert statements once
assert(isinstance(number,int)),"Needs a whole number"
assert(number>0),"Needs a positive whole number"
return FibonacciStorage._fib(number)
# use a more readable name
getFib = FibonacciStorage.fib
print getFib(50)
I found this code on the net and tried to comment each line to understand what it is actually doing. I don't understand how this is a recursion, it does loop through the code until the correct result is given but I don't see how its calling itself.
I thought it was this line, at first: result = FibonacciStorage._fib(number-1) + FibonacciStorage._fib(number-2) but I'm confused because my print FibonacciStorage._storage line shows the storage cache growing and growing, yet the line below it is a return function. I suspect I do not understand how return result is actually somehow triggering the recursion again.
I'm also not sure how the storage dictionary is making this program go so fast. My simple recursions of the fib sequence take a long time(even when I save the data) but in this case if you do a print getFib(200) its instant. How is the caching making it so fast?
So to sum up, two questions:
1) How is the recursion actually being triggered? If my print statement is being accessed on each loop?
2) How is caching speeding this up over other fib sequences? Is the class structure or #staticmethod making a difference? For example, this seems instant while the ones on http://en.literateprograms.org/Fibonacci_numbers_(Python) have a slight delay.
3) Maybe also out of intrest, can a fibnocci type algo scale(split up and run in parallel) just out of intrest or are they limited to one process?
Any insight would be helpful.
(1) The recursive call is on this line:
result = FibonacciStorage._fib(number-1) + FibonacciStorage._fib(number-2)
// here ^ and here ^
You're right, this is "the actual Fibonacci formula", which is recursive by definition.
(2) Caching is speeding it up immensely. What's making a difference is the persistent object _storage, which is saving you a spectacular amount of duplicate work. Consider:
fib(4)
/ \
fib(3) + fib(2)
/ \ / \
fib(2) + fib(1) fib(1) + fib(0)
/ \
fib(1) + fib(0)
This is just fib(4), and you can already see the redundancy. By simply caching the integer values of fib(3) and fib(4), you'll reduce the number of calculations required for fib(5) from 7 to 1. And the savings only grow as you go higher.
The fibonacci implementation in the question uses a technique called memoization for storing the values already computed and efficiently retrieving them each time they're needed, instead of re-calculating them. This has a huge performance benefit, because values only need to be calculated once.
About your questions:
The recursion is triggered in this line: FibonacciStorage._fib(number-1) + FibonacciStorage._fib(number-2), as you can see the _fib procedure is calling itself
The caching is greatly improving the speed of the calculation, see this example for a complete explanation of how this works. Using static methods isn't particularly useful in this case, it only makes the implementation more contrived
A recursive, non-memoized version might be split in a parallel algorithm where each call to fibonacci gets performed on a different thread. However the overhead would be considerable, and the algorithmic complexity wouldn't be improved at all. Stick to the memoized version, or read about faster ways to calculate fibonacci.
It's good to know that Python dicts have a __missing__ method that's invoked for missing keys:
class FibonacciStorage(dict):
def __missing__(self, n):
self[n] = self[n - 1] + self[n - 2]
return self[n]
Usage:
fib = FibonacciStorage({0: 1, 1: 1})
print(fib[50]) #20365011074

Categories

Resources