Article View: comp.std.c++
Article #1102Re: Recursive templates
From: Pete Becker
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:21
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:21
12 lines
1159 bytes
1159 bytes
In article <Bxu3J4.F93@news.cso.uiuc.edu> pl2440@meibm31.cen.uiuc.edu (Paul Jay Lucas) writes: > >*****> Has anyone got a *real* justification for this? This is a very > obfuscated way of writing factorial. Has anyone got a *real* justification for recursive functions? They just provide a very obfuscated way of writing factorial(). The point of my original posting was simply that there is no work to be done to specify how such things work, because they already work in exactly the way you'd expect. Whether there are useful things that can be done with such constructs is left as an exercise for the reader... -- Pete
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1992Nov17.172152.14255@borland.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!borland.com!peteReferences:
<83733@ut-emx.uucp> <1992Nov16.220526.21566@borland.com> <Bxu3J4.F93@news.cso.uiuc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!csus.edu!borland.com!pete From: pete@borland.com (Pete Becker) Subject: Re: Recursive templates Message-ID: <1992Nov17.172152.14255@borland.com> Originator: pete@genghis.borland.com Sender: news@borland.com (News Admin) Organization: Borland International References: <83733@ut-emx.uucp> <1992Nov16.220526.21566@borland.com> <Bxu3J4.F93@news.cso.uiuc.edu> Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:21:52 GMT Lines: 15