3 ms·
Yes, I understand that recursion is much more appealing and leads to much cleaner and elegant code than iterative solutions. and thank you for the introduction
by aeon10 14y ago
Yes, I understand that recursion is much more appealing and leads to much cleaner and elegant code than iterative solutions. and thank you for the introduction to the community I suppose.
Anyway I forked the original code, added an iterative version based on the comment by (Nick Craig Wood)
(https://github.com/AeonAxan/benchmarking_fibonacci https://github.com/AeonAxan/benchmarking_fibonacci)
Here are the benchmarks
[recursive fib: 7,765 ms] |
[iterative fib: 8,047 ms] |
[analytic opt fib: 54,875] |
[analytic fib: 103,937 ms] |
And it appears that the recursive version is faster than the naive iterative version by a few hundred milliseconds.
- aeon10 14y agoJust a note, In the iterative solution, by changing the i (loop variable) from an int to an long int the times by both iterative and recursive are almost equal. Here are the new results [Recursive - 7921 ms], [Iteratiive - 8078 ms] So the difference is negligible.