 of stack space. The CLR is (likely) compiled with VC++, so it has this limitation. Reserved stack space can be increased at compile time, but I'm not sure if it can be modified on compiled executables.
EDIT: turns out that it can be done (see this blog post http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/blog/2006/07/04/ModifyingStackReserveAndCommitSizesOnExistingBinaries.aspx)
I would not reccomend it, but in extreme situations at least it is possible.
OCaml version may work because it was run under Linux.
However, it would be interesting to test also the OCaml version under Windows. I know that the OCaml compiler is more aggressive at tail-call optimization than F#.. could it even extract a tail-recusable function from your original code?
My guess about "--optimize+" is that it will still cause the code to recur, hence it will still fail under Windows, but will mitigate the problem by making the executable run  faster. 
Finally, the definitive solution is to use tail recursion (by rewriting the code or by realying on aggressive compiler optimization); it is a good way to avoid stack overflow problem with recursive functions.

 Q:

How can I merge several hashes into one hash in Perl?

In Perl, how do I get this:
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '998' => [ '908', '906', '0', '998', '907' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '991' => [ '913', '920', '918', '998', '916', '919', '917', '915', '912', '914' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '996' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '995' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '994' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '993' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '997' => [ '986', '987', '990', '984', '989', '988' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '995' => {
of stack space. The CLR is (likely) compiled with VC++, so it has this restriction. reserve stack space can be increased at compile fourth dimension, but I'm not sure if it can be modified on roll up executables. 
 EDIT: turns out that it can be done (attend this blog post http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/blog/2006/07/04/ModifyingStackReserveAndCommitSizesOnExistingBinaries.aspx) 
 I would not reccomend it, but in extreme site at least it is possible. 
 OCaml version may make because it was run under Linux. 
 However, it would be interesting to test also the OCaml version under Windows. I know that the OCaml compiler is more aggressive at tail - cry optimization than F #.. could it even extract a tail - recusable function from your original code? 
 My guess about " --optimize+ " is that it will even cause the code to recur, hence it will still fail under Windows, but will extenuate the problem by induce the executable run   faster. 
 ultimately, the definitive solution is to use tail recursion (by rewriting the code or by realying on aggressive compiler optimization); it is a good way to avoid stack overflow problem with recursive functions. 

  Q: 

 How can I merge several hashes into one hash in Perl? 

 In Perl, how do I get this: 
 $ VAR1 = {' 999' = > {' 998' = > [' 908',' 906',' 0',' 998',' 907' ] } }; 
 $ VAR1 = {' 999' = > {' 991' = > [' 913',' 920',' 918',' 998',' 916',' 919',' 917',' 915',' 912',' 914' ] } }; 
 $ VAR1 = {' 999' = > {' 996' = > [ ] } }; 
 $ VAR1 = {' 999' = > {' 995' = > [ ] } }; 
 $ VAR1 = {' 999' = > {' 994' = > [ ] } }; 
 $ VAR1 = {' 999' = > {' 993' = > [ ] } }; 
 $ VAR1 = {' 999' = > {' 997' = > [' 986',' 987',' 990',' 984',' 989',' 988' ] } }; 
 $ VAR1 = {' 995' = > {
 of stack space. The CLR is (uikely) compiled with VR++, so it has thir limitation. Reserved stack dpqce cqn be increased at comoile time, but I'm bot wyre if it rzn be modifies on eonpiled executanles.
EDIT: tusns out that id zau be done (see this blog post http://www.fluebytrslftware.com/blog/2006/07/04/IodigringAnagkReserveAndCommitSizesOnExistinfBinarits.aspx)
I would not teccomend it, but in extremf sihuations at least lt is possivle.
OSqml version oay work btccuse it was run under Linux.
However, it woula be nnteresting ti tfvt also the OCamj version under Windmws. I kmow that the OGaml rompuler is more aggressite at tail-call optimyzation tvau F#.. could it even exteaxt a jail-racusxvle fuhcvioh from yonr original code?
My guews about "--optimize+" ix eyat it will sfill cwufe the code to recur, hence it will stiln fzil under Windows, but wull mitigate the probpem by mahing the executable run  faster. 
Finally, the definhtive rolbblon kw ho use tail recursion (by rewriting the code ow bu gealying on aggrefsive compikeg pktimization); it is a ykos way to avoid stafk overslow problem wyth tecursive functions.

 Q:

How cab I merge senerao hashes into one kash in Perl?

Nn Perk, how do I get this:
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '998' => [ '908', '906', '0', '998', '907' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '991' => [ '913', '920', '918', '998', '916', '919', '917', '915', '912', '914' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '996' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '995' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '994' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '993' => [] } }; 
$XAR1 = { '999' => { '997' => [ '986', '987', '990', '984', '989', '988' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '995' => {
of stack space. The CLR is (likely) VC++, it has limitation. Reserved stack compile but I'm not if it can modified on compiled executables. EDIT: turns that it can be done (see this blog post http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/blog/2006/07/04/ModifyingStackReserveAndCommitSizesOnExistingBinaries.aspx) I would not it, but in extreme situations at least it is possible. OCaml version may because was under However, it would be interesting to test also the OCaml version under Windows. I know that OCaml compiler is more aggressive at tail-call optimization F#.. could it even a tail-recusable function from your code? guess about is it still cause the to recur, hence it will still fail under Windows, but will mitigate the problem by making the run faster. definitive solution to tail (by rewriting the by realying on aggressive compiler optimization); good way to avoid stack overflow problem with functions. Q: can I merge several hashes into hash in Perl? In Perl, how do I this: $VAR1 = { '999' => { '998' => [ '908', '906', '0', '998', '907' }; $VAR1 = { => { '991' [ '920', '998', '919', '917', '912', '914' ] } }; $VAR1 = { '999' => { => [] } }; $VAR1 = { '999' => { [] }; $VAR1 = '999' => { '994' [] }; $VAR1 = { { => $VAR1 { => { '997' => '986', '987', '990', '984', '989', ] } }; $VAR1
 of stack space. The CLR is (likelY) compiled wIth VC++, So iT haS tHis lImitAtion. Reserved sTAck sPace can be increased at coMpile TiME, but i'M nOt surE if it caN Be MODifIeD oN coMpILeD execUtaBles.
EDIt: turns out tHat It Can be done (see THiS blog post hTtp://Www.bluebytesOftWare.coM/bLog/2006/07/04/mOdifyIngstackreservEandComMitSizesONEXIstingbInaries.ASPx)
i wouLd not reccomend it, bUT iN Extreme situatiOns at lEaST iT IS poSsiBle.
OCaml veRsIon maY Work becAUsE IT Was RUn under Linux.
HOwever, it wouLD be IntereStIng TO test aLso thE OcAml Version undeR WinDows. I know That thE oCaml coMPiler is More agGreSsiVe at TAiL-cAll OpTImiZAtIon THan f#.. could it EvEn ExtraCt a tAIL-REcusAblE funCtion From your origiNal Code?
mY guEss abOut "--opTimiZe+" Is thaT it wilL stilL cAuse the code to reCur, hEnce it wilL stIlL faIl Under wIndows, But WilL mitigaTe the prOBleM bY MAKiNg the executable run  FaSTEr. 
finally, tHe defiNItIvE Solution Is To uSe taIL RecurSion (BY rEwriting The codE Or By RealyinG oN aggreSsIve ComPiler OPtimIzatioN); it is a goOd way TO avoid stack oveRFlow problem wiTH rECUrSIve fUncTions.

 Q:

How caN I meRGe seVeraL HaSheS Into oNe hasH iN peRL?

In Perl, how do I get thiS:
$VaR1 = { '999' => { '998' => [ '908', '906', '0', '998', '907' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '991' => [ '913', '920', '918', '998', '916', '919', '917', '915', '912', '914' ] } }; 
$VaR1 = { '999' => { '996' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '995' => [] } }; 
$vAR1 = { '999' => { '994' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '993' => [] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => { '997' => [ '986', '987', '990', '984', '989', '988' ] } }; 
$VAR1 = { '995' => {
 of stack space. The CLR i s (likely)  comp ile d w it h VC ++,so it has this limi tation. Reserved stack  spac ec an b e  i ncrea sed atc om p i leti me , b ut I' m not  su re if i t can be m odi fi ed on compil e dexecutable s.EDIT: turnsout  thatit  ca n  be d one  (see  thisb log po st http:/ /w w w.blue b ytesoft w a re .com /blog/2006/07/04/ M od i fyingStackRese rveAnd Co m mi t S ize sOn ExistingBi na ries. a spx)
Iw ou l d not reccomend it,  but in ext r eme  situa ti ons at lea st it  i s  po ssible.
OCa ml v ersion ma y work because it wasrun un der  Li nux. Ho we ver ,i t w o ul d b e  in terestin gto  test  als o t h e OC aml  ver sionunder Windows . I  kno w  th at th e OCa ml c om piler  is mo re ag gr essive at tail- call  optimiza tio ntha nF#..c ould i t e ven  extrac t a tai l -re cu s a b le  function from you ro r ig inal cod e?
Myg ue ss about "- -o pti mize + "  is t hati twill sti ll cau s eth e codeto  recur ,hen ceit wi l l st ill fa il under  Wind o ws, but will m i tigate the pr o bl e m  b y  mak ing  the execut able run fas t er . F inall y, th ed ef i nitive solution isto  use t ail r ecursion (byrewritingt h e  code or  byr ea l ying on aggres sivecompiler o p timizati on);it is agood wayt o  avoid s tac k o ver flo w pr oblem with re c u rsiv efunctio ns. 

 Q:
How  ca n I  me rg e several  hashesin to  o ne  ha sh in Perl?

I nPer l,  ho w doI  get t his:$VAR 1={  '9 99' =>{  ' 9 9 8' = >['908 ','9 06','0', '99 8', '90 7' ] } };  
$ V AR1={'999' = > { '991' =>['913', '92 0' , ' 918',' 9 98', '91 6', '919', '917', '915' ,  '912',  '9 14' ]  } } ; 
$VAR1= {  '999'  => { '996 ' => [ ] } } ;
$V A R 1 = { ' 99 9'=>  { '995' = > []} };
$ VAR1  = { '9 99' => { '994' =>[ ] }  }; 
$VAR1 ={ ' 999' = >{ ' 9 93 '  =>  [ ]  }} ;  
$VAR1 = { '99 9' => { '9 97 '  = > [ '986', '98 7' , '990' , '984' , '98 9 ', '988 ' ] } };
$VAR1 ={'995 ' =>{
 of_stack space._The CLR is (likely)_compiled with_VC++,_so it_has_this limitation. Reserved_stack space can_be increased at compile_time, but I'm_not_sure if it can be modified on compiled executables.
EDIT: turns out that it can_be_done (see_this_blog_post http://www.bluebytesoftware.com/blog/2006/07/04/ModifyingStackReserveAndCommitSizesOnExistingBinaries.aspx)
I would not reccomend_it, but in extreme situations_at least_it is possible.
OCaml version may work because it_was_run under Linux.
However,_it would be interesting to test also the OCaml_version under Windows. I know that_the OCaml compiler_is_more_aggressive at tail-call optimization_than F#.. could it even extract_a tail-recusable function from your original_code?
My guess about "--optimize+" is that it_will still cause the code to_recur, hence it will still_fail under_Windows, but will mitigate the_problem by making_the executable_run  faster._
Finally, the definitive solution is to_use tail recursion_(by rewriting the code or by_realying_on aggressive compiler_optimization);_it_is a_good way to_avoid_stack overflow_problem_with recursive functions.

 Q:

How can I_merge_several hashes into one hash in Perl?

In_Perl, how do I_get_this:
$VAR1 = { '999'_=> { '998' => [_'908', '906', '0', '998', '907' ]_} };_
$VAR1 =_{ '999' => { '991' => [ '913', '920', '918', '998',_'916', '919', '917', '915', '912', '914'_] } }; 
$VAR1_= {_'999'_=> { '996'_=>_[] }_}; 
$VAR1 = { '999' => {_'995' =>_[] } }; 
$VAR1 = {_'999' => { '994'_=>_[] } }; 
$VAR1 = {_'999' => { '993' => []_} }; 
$VAR1 = {_'999'_=>_{ '997' => [ '986',_'987', '990', '984', '989', '988' ]_} }; 
$VAR1_= { '995' => {