<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>marzapower&#187; recursion</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.marzapower.com/tag/recursion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.marzapower.com</link>
	<description>2.times { think_before :posting }</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Sep 2011 21:34:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Mastering the Ackermann Function - Part 2</title>
		<link>http://www.marzapower.com/2010/08/02/mastering-the-ackermann-function-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.marzapower.com/2010/08/02/mastering-the-ackermann-function-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2010 08:06:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>marzapower</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Computer science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hyper operators]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Python]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recursion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marzapower.com/?p=362</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In one of my latest posts I reviewed the <strong>Ackermann function</strong>. We left with some <strong>unsolved problems</strong> about efficiency and computability of the function itself. Throughout this post I'll give another point of view for the Ackermann function, and something magic wil come out ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.marzapower.com/2010/08/02/mastering-the-ackermann-function-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mastering the Ackermann Function</title>
		<link>http://www.marzapower.com/2010/07/29/mastering-the-ackermann-function/</link>
		<comments>http://www.marzapower.com/2010/07/29/mastering-the-ackermann-function/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 09:06:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>marzapower</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Computer science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[algorithm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mathematics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Python]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recursion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.marzapower.com/?p=329</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yesterday I came in touch with a curious, astonishing mathematical function. It's called Ackermann function.

Mathematically speaking, it is a <strong>well-defined total function</strong>. That is, it has defined values for every integer input (= total function), and this value is not ambiguous (every input has one and one only possible output value) (= well-defined).

Speaking about computer science, this function is <strong>computable</strong>, but it's not a <strong>primitive recursive</strong> function. In other words, you can implement an algorithm to express the function using <strong>while-loops</strong> (= computable), but still you cannot write an equivalent algorithm using only <strong>do-loops</strong> (= not primitive recursive). I suggest you to try this statement.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.marzapower.com/2010/07/29/mastering-the-ackermann-function/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

