3 ms·
Actually, that should be: whoops(n): for i in n: whoops(n-1) Your version is merely quadratic.
by a1369209993 7y ago
Actually, that should be:
whoops(n):
for i in n:
whoops(n-1)
Your version is merely quadratic.
- trehalose 7y agoI don't quite understand your code, but if I'm guessing correctly that n is an integer and "for i in n" means in human terms "for all non-negative integers less than n", that is not exponential, that is actually factorial, which is superexponential. Uh, or close to factorial, I'm not sure exactly. Testing it in python right now, incrementing a counter each time whoops is called, I'm seeing a relationship that looks like whoops(n) == n * whoops(n-1) + 1 That is interesting.
- a1369209993 7y ago> that is not exponential, that is actually factorial, which is superexponential Fair point; I should have given: whoops(n): if(!n) return for i in 2: whoops(n-1) I think it's clear that it is "trivial to go exponential", though. And for that matter, also trivial to go superexponential apparently.