Timeline for Loading... Forever
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:04 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Dec 4, 2016 at 17:43 | comment | added | DJMcMayhem | @ChristianRondeau I'm glad you like it, but IMO this is the more impressive answer . :D | |
| Dec 4, 2016 at 17:39 | comment | added | Christian Rondeau |
Almost every time you post an answer to a challenge, I learn something new (in this case, @: and :sl), so thanks and keep them coming :)
|
|
| Nov 29, 2016 at 14:59 | comment | added | Yakk |
@dahnoak There is no reason why the vi engine couldn't notice the tail recursion. And some implementations of recursion would do so naturally (imagine if there is a vector of commands to-be-executed, and a current execution location. Then @q would insert at-current-location the contents of register script q. No stack needed, and no memory allocated unless there are commands to run after @q within q.)
|
|
| Nov 28, 2016 at 20:53 | history | edited | DJMcMayhem | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 25 characters in body
|
| Nov 28, 2016 at 20:46 | comment | added | udioica |
If you switch i to S and move it inside the macro, you can skip r|.
|
|
| Nov 28, 2016 at 17:14 | comment | added | DJMcMayhem | @dahnoak Well, obviously I can't infinitely test it, but it doesn't allocate any extra memory, so I can't see any reason it wouldn't work indefinitely. | |
| Nov 28, 2016 at 17:11 | comment | added | Dan Oak | just curios: does it violate "Your program should be able to run indefinitely"? can it eventually reach a stack overflow? :) | |
| Nov 28, 2016 at 15:06 | history | edited | DJMcMayhem | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 978 characters in body
|
| Nov 28, 2016 at 14:59 | history | edited | DJMcMayhem | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Nov 28, 2016 at 7:20 | history | answered | DJMcMayhem | CC BY-SA 3.0 |