@Eeeew Spiders: I know what recursion is!! >.< >.< >.<
I also know what it's not. Fractals are a graphical example of recursion. When I say "larger structure being made of smaller versions of itself" that's not necessarily graphical.
My example of a recursion relation, that was in response to tehOen's dictionary quote (which he misinterpreted), was a proper example of what was described in his quote. So long as it is not limited, the operation could be performed endlessly. If something recurses endlessly, that does not make it a fractal. Fractals are strictly geometrical. My recursion relation example was algebraic and not a fractal.
If nulls code called another piece of code within it, this would not make it recursive. It would have to call itself (or at least something very similar to itself).
"A recursive definition is a function that uses itself in its definition list"
From this I get the impression you understand what recursion is. Though strictly speaking, it doesn't have to be a function. This, I think, is only a communication error and not because you fail to understand the concept itself. I'm not sure why you're telling me this, though, as my original post said the following:
I am not against any cheat it could be fun but I am against recursion..
This statement is recursive. In other words, "This statement is recursive" is recursive. Put another way, ""This statement is recursive" is recursive" is recursive.
I'm not sure you mean recursion. Recursion is defining something in terms of itself. Iteration is closer to your intended meaning. Plagiarism is even more suited.
BTW, funny code Eeeew ^^
I find this topic more interesting than the "Evlesoa is cheatzor" topic that others have now moved onto.. but I guess I'll go back on topic:
Is there actually anything about aimbotters having GUIDs that is dangerous? (other than no longer being able to use it as a rule for telling when a person can't be aimbotting)