rcj (03/22/83)
These people who jump on something without first carefully reading it really burn me up!!!! I refer to the recent comment on Pavel's article about teaching recursion, in which comment the author tried to prove with 'the farmer takes...' garbage that iteration is easier to understand than recursion. I bet he really feels smug about that one. I have just one question for that author: Who ever said that iteration was \NOT/ easier to understand than recursion? Go back and read the article that you commented on and I think that you will find that Pavel merely said that (except \POSSIBLY/ for a couple of specific examples like the Tower of Hanoi and tree-walking), iteration IS easier to understand. He merely points out that recursion shouldn't be that much harder if taught properly. I heartily agree with Pavel, I had a favorable introduction to recursion and it was a breeze. And was it fast!!!! I love it. Please, people, be sure that the article that you make fun of or try to refute is actually making the assertion that you are refuting!!