只是消磨时间……递归函数

void foo(Node* node)
{
    if(node == NULL)
       return;
    // Do something with node...
    foo(node->left);
    foo(node->right);
}

可转换为

void foo(Node* node)
{
    if(node == NULL)
       return;

    // Do something with node...

    stack.push(node->right);
    stack.push(node->left);

    while(!stack.empty()) {
         node1 = stack.pop();
         if(node1 == NULL)
            continue;
         // Do something with node1...
         stack.push(node1->right);             
         stack.push(node1->left);
    }

}

实际上，最常见的方法是保留自己的堆栈。下面是一个C语言的递归快速排序函数:

void quicksort(int* array, int left, int right)
{
    if(left >= right)
        return;

    int index = partition(array, left, right);
    quicksort(array, left, index - 1);
    quicksort(array, index + 1, right);
}

以下是我们如何通过保持自己的堆栈来实现迭代:

void quicksort(int *array, int left, int right)
{
    int stack[1024];
    int i=0;

    stack[i++] = left;
    stack[i++] = right;

    while (i > 0)
    {
        right = stack[--i];
        left = stack[--i];

        if (left >= right)
             continue;

        int index = partition(array, left, right);
        stack[i++] = left;
        stack[i++] = index - 1;
        stack[i++] = index + 1;
        stack[i++] = right;
    }
}

显然，这个例子没有检查堆栈边界……实际上，你可以根据最坏的情况来确定堆栈的大小。但你懂的。

似乎没有人指出递归函数在主体中调用自己超过一次的位置，并处理返回递归中的特定点(即不是原始递归)。据说每一个递归都可以转化为迭代，所以这似乎是可能的。

我刚刚想出了一个如何做到这一点的c#示例。假设您有以下递归函数，它的作用类似于poststorder遍历，AbcTreeNode是一个带有指针a、b、c的3元树。

public static void AbcRecursiveTraversal(this AbcTreeNode x, List<int> list) {
        if (x != null) {
            AbcRecursiveTraversal(x.a, list);
            AbcRecursiveTraversal(x.b, list);
            AbcRecursiveTraversal(x.c, list);
            list.Add(x.key);//finally visit root
        }
}

迭代解:

        int? address = null;
        AbcTreeNode x = null;
        x = root;
        address = A;
        stack.Push(x);
        stack.Push(null)    

        while (stack.Count > 0) {
            bool @return = x == null;

            if (@return == false) {

                switch (address) {
                    case A://   
                        stack.Push(x);
                        stack.Push(B);
                        x = x.a;
                        address = A;
                        break;
                    case B:
                        stack.Push(x);
                        stack.Push(C);
                        x = x.b;
                        address = A;
                        break;
                    case C:
                        stack.Push(x);
                        stack.Push(null);
                        x = x.c;
                        address = A;
                        break;
                    case null:
                        list_iterative.Add(x.key);
                        @return = true;
                        break;
                }

            }


            if (@return == true) {
                address = (int?)stack.Pop();
                x = (AbcTreeNode)stack.Pop();
            }


        }

这个链接提供了一些解释，并提出了保持“位置”的想法，以便能够在几个递归调用之间到达确切的位置:

但是，所有这些示例都描述了递归调用进行固定次数的场景。当你遇到以下情况时，事情就变得棘手了:

function rec(...) {
  for/while loop {
    var x = rec(...)
    // make a side effect involving return value x
  }
}

一般来说，通过简单地使用存储变量，可以将递归模拟为迭代。注意，递归和迭代通常是等价的;其中一种几乎总是可以转化为另一种。尾递归函数很容易转化为迭代函数。只需要将累加器变量设置为局部变量，并迭代而不是递归。下面是c++中的一个例子(如果不使用默认参数的话):

// tail-recursive
int factorial (int n, int acc = 1)
{
  if (n == 1)
    return acc;
  else
    return factorial(n - 1, acc * n);
}

// iterative
int factorial (int n)
{
  int acc = 1;
  for (; n > 1; --n)
    acc *= n;
  return acc;
}

据我所知，我可能在代码中犯了一个错误，但想法是存在的。

This is an old question but I want to add a different aspect as a solution. I'm currently working on a project in which I used the flood fill algorithm using C#. Normally, I implemented this algorithm with recursion at first, but obviously, it caused a stack overflow. After that, I changed the method from recursion to iteration. Yes, It worked and I was no longer getting the stack overflow error. But this time, since I applied the flood fill method to very large structures, the program was going into an infinite loop. For this reason, it occurred to me that the function may have re-entered the places it had already visited. As a definitive solution to this, I decided to use a dictionary for visited points. If that node(x,y) has already been added to the stack structure for the first time, that node(x,y) will be saved in the dictionary as the key. Even if the same node is tried to be added again later, it won't be added to the stack structure because the node is already in the dictionary. Let's see on pseudo-code:

startNode = pos(x,y)

Stack stack = new Stack();

Dictionary visited<pos, bool> = new Dictionary();

stack.Push(startNode);

while(stack.count != 0){
    currentNode = stack.Pop();
    if "check currentNode if not available"
        continue;
    if "check if already handled"
        continue;
    else if "run if it must be wanted thing should be handled"      
        // make something with pos currentNode.X and currentNode.X  
        
        // then add its neighbor nodes to the stack to iterate
        // but at first check if it has already been visited.
        
        if(!visited.Contains(pos(x-1,y)))
            visited[pos(x-1,y)] = true;
            stack.Push(pos(x-1,y));
        if(!visited.Contains(pos(x+1,y)))
            ...
        if(!visited.Contains(pos(x,y+1)))
            ...
        if(!visited.Contains(pos(x,y-1)))
            ...
}