-4
$\begingroup$

What theories are there on the topic of recursive functions begins by generally describing recursive functions, as a demonstration of what I'm looking for (and also as an indication of my current knowledge, thus showing what references would help me).

It has gotten meager attention, and the little attention it has gotten, has been negative.

So, I wonder, was it the description, or the broadness, or both? Or something else? Would this question be better off without the descriptions?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just for information: the chatroom Constructive Feedback might be another place where you might receive feedback on your post. $\endgroup$ Sep 19 at 12:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I dare say some people got as far as "It's looks lengthy, but it is very simple, so do not worry." and stopped. $\endgroup$ Sep 19 at 12:48
  • $\begingroup$ I left you a Comment under the Question. $\endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Sep 19 at 13:58
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I don't think this is a commonly studied area, so I don't think you could do without the descriptions. And your underlying question is broad. I'm afraid it's just not well suited for here. But I left a more detailed comment under it as well. $\endgroup$ Sep 19 at 14:41

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .