Ok. Fair point.
However usually in life we don’t go from zero to hero, or 0 to 100% in one go.
We make conceptual leaps as we gain an understanding of anything.
More likley than not two steps forward and one step back as we progress.
If a psuedo-count is not Ok, then perhaps a simple explanation of the fact that there is a count somewhere.
Becasue this is the first challenge where a count is in use and there is no variable declared to hold it.
I think the point people are trying to make is that there is not a count somewhere. It is merely a function returning the value of an expression.
OK.
I see what you are saying. I already got that but looking at it all again definatley helped me see it all more clearly.
I agree with you.
So there is no counter, I see that, but nevertheless there is a counting process occuring .
See what just happened there:
Student: how do you count without a counting process?
So the counting process could also be referenced as going through a loop until a certain condition is met. Rember, recursion can replace for loops in certain useful cases.
Only in this case it’s not a loop, but instead the function calling itself. Which is kind of a loop, but not in the classical sense of a for loop.
Edit: Because it isn’t really a counting process. It is simple addition with numbers that hide themselves in complex ways.
Thanks, I think that is even mentioned in the challenge.
It didn’t help me “get it” though.
Why can a recursive counting process be analogous to counting with a loop,
But a recursive process that counts is not analagous to a counting process?
What are we counting here? We are adding numbers in an array. I would not think of this as a counting process.
This topic was automatically closed 182 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.