• MotoAsh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    The underlying truth of this joke is: Programming syntax is less confusing than mathematical syntax. There are genuinely ambiguous layouts of syntax in math (to a human reader that hasn’t internalized PEMDAS, anyways) whereas you get a compilation error if ANYTHING is ambiguous in programming. (yes, I am WELL aware of the frustrations of runtime errors)

        • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Same as PEMDAS, except:

          Parentheses -> Bracket

          Exponent -> Order

          Multiplication <-> Division

          BODMAS

          • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            I learned it as “BEDMAS”

            Brackets

            Exponents

            (You can guess the rest)

            But when I learned BEDMAS, my teacher directed us to do implied multiplication before other multiplication/division. Which, as far as I’m aware, is mathematically correct according to the proper order of operations (instead of whatever acronym summary you learned).

            Before I get "umm. Acktually"d … I know that’s not the full picture of the order of operations as it should be in mathematics. But for the limited scope I learned of algebra from highschool, AFAIK, this is correct to the point that I have understanding of. I’m not a mathematician, and I work with computers all day long and they do the math for me when I need to do any of it. So higher understanding in my case is not helpful.

            • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Order is often used to describe exponents when talking about functions and other mathematical properties. In a lot of cases, it’s also equivalent to a degree. For example, a function y = x² - 9 is a second-order/degree polynomial.

              Alternatively, one could find a second-order rate of a reaction, which means the rate of reaction is proportional to the square of a solution’s concentration.

              • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                8 months ago

                You have the right idea, and you are right in some regards. Generally the order of magnitude is an order of 10. That is, 1350 could be represented as 1.350×10³, so the order of magnitude is the third order of 10, which is 10³ (i.e. some value x×1000).

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I mean … yea. The exact problem is math is not taught correctly. Order of operations make total logical sense for what the operations are doing.

        The problem only arises when people don’t come to all of the appropriate conclusions on their own.

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Also: sometimes, a mathematician just has to invent some concept or syntax to convey something unconventional. The specific use of subscript/superscript, whatever ‘phi’ is being used for, etc. on whatever paper you’re reading doesn’t have to correlate to how other work uses the same concepts. It’s bad form, but sometimes its needed, and if useful enough is added to the general canon of what we call “math”. Meanwhile, you can encapsulate and obfuscate things in software, sure, but you can always get down to the bedrock of what the language supports; there’s no inventing anything new.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Yea, that’s it. Math syntax was created for humans, and programming syntax had to always remain deterministic for computers. It’s not an insult to either, just interesting how ambiguities show up often when humans are involved. I say ‘often’ for the general case: Math should be just as deterministic as programming, but it’s not in some situations.