The Directory Walker revisited

[wouter]

Sure, but then if you walk directories with the recursive one, do you 
know in advance how high you have to set the recursionlimit?
Anyway why did they set a recursionlimit on recursive function calls 
and not on repeat loops? The answer is somewhere in the reference on 
the recursionlimit:

  < This property allows you to adjust the limit on the depth of 
recursion for function calls, decreasing it for quicker failure during 
development, or increasing it if you require more depth to execute a 
recursive algorithm on a larger data set.  The value is the size in 
bytes of the CPU call stack.  The actual function call depth limit will 
depend on such factors as the CPU type, how functions are called, and 
the number of parameters passed to each function. >

  I am sure you can figure out why.

Have a nice evening,
WA



On maandag, sep 1, 2003, at 18:01 Europe/Brussels, 
use-revolution-request at lists.runrev.com wrote:

> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 09:56:01 -0600
> Subject: Re: The Directory Walker revisited
> From: Alex Rice <alex at mindlube.com>
> To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Reply-To: use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>
>
> On Monday, September 1, 2003, at 04:45  AM, wouter wrote:
>
>> But I watched it bump into the recursion-limit wall.
>> Following is a non recursive version of this script.
>
> I thought we could set the recursion limit in Rev 2.x?
>
> Alex Rice <alex at mindlube.com> | Mindlube Software | http://mindlube.com
>