Timeline for Time complexity of functions that call each other
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:37 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Jan 19, 2017 at 17:02 | vote | accept | Mike Sweeney | ||
| Jan 19, 2017 at 7:46 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackCompSci/status/821987100530708480 | ||
| Jan 19, 2017 at 3:42 | vote | accept | Mike Sweeney | ||
| Jan 19, 2017 at 7:24 | |||||
| Jan 19, 2017 at 3:41 | comment | added | Mike Sweeney | @quicksort I wasn't questioning your answer, I'm clearly struggling with this. Based on previous questions I'd seen people recommend using Wolfram so that's why I used it. | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 22:13 | comment | added | quicksort | How does that contradict what I said and what does that Wolfram query have to do with anything at all? (just by the way: don't use Wolfram Alpha for solving recursive equations of complexity, it's a terrible tool). Intuition for exponential running time: Function splits in two. Each recursive call splits in two. Each of them further splits in two... See any pattern? | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 21:52 | answer | added | gnasher729 | timeline score: 3 | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 17:46 | history | edited | Mike Sweeney | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 328 characters in body
|
| Jan 18, 2017 at 12:05 | answer | added | quicksort | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jan 18, 2017 at 10:29 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 18, 2017 at 13:27 | |||||
| Jan 18, 2017 at 10:28 | history | asked | Mike Sweeney | CC BY-SA 3.0 |