I wrote: > I dunno, that doesn't really seem clearer to me (although some of it > might be that you expended no effort on making the comments match > the new code logic).
... although looking closer, this formulation does have one very nice advantage: for the typical non-star case with high = low = 1, the only recursive call is a tail recursion, so it ought to consume less stack space than what I wrote. Let me see what I can do with the comments. regards, tom lane