I was reading a description for a computer algorithm. Get this, the 
authors claim that the time-complexity is proportional to the "inverse 
Ackermann function".

That's a good thing, right? I mean, the Ackermann function grows 
absurdly fast, so its inverse presumably grows absurdly slowly.

(Quite how any algorithm's run-time could ever be proportional to 
something as obscure and arbitrarily defined as the inverse of the 
Ackermann function, I have no idea... I guess now I've seen everything.)

Post a reply to this message