 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-11-2009 11:35, Invisible wrote:
>>> (I know some people use the triple-line symbol for this though.)
>>>
>>> The main confusion is between assignment and equality, generally.
>>
>> That is why most languages have separate symbols for both meanings
>> (and why I am advocating imperative languages without assignment).
>
> Heh. How many C programs fail because people use "=" instead of "=="?
>
> (Most strongly-typed languages manage to catch this mistake. C is
> deliberately designed to make this mistake a valid program construct.
> Friggin' weirdos...)
No, if they did it differently it would break other functionality.
>>> Or, in mathematics, between a test for equality and a statement of
>>> equality.
>>
>> Can you give an example of that?
>
> If I say "x = sqrt(y/z)", do I mean that x *is* equal to this RHS? Or is
> it an equation that must be solved by *making* x equal to the RHS?
Or is it the definition of z because x and y are known.
And there is still the other interpretation of being false everywhere in
3D space except on some curves planes.
> Similarly, this fragment can appear inside a statement, such as "f(x) =
> 3 if x = sqrt(y/z), otherwise 9". In that case, the "x = sqrt(y/z)" part
> is clearly a conditional test.
I don't remember 'if' being part of my maths course. Yet yhere must be
specialized subfields where it is defined.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Similarly, this fragment can appear inside a statement, such as "f(x)
>> = 3 if x = sqrt(y/z), otherwise 9". In that case, the "x = sqrt(y/z)"
>> part is clearly a conditional test.
>
> I don't remember 'if' being part of my maths course. Yet yhere must be
> specialized subfields where it is defined.
How about
sinc(x) = if x = 0 then 1 else sin(x) / x
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-11-2009 22:52, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Similarly, this fragment can appear inside a statement, such as "f(x)
>>> = 3 if x = sqrt(y/z), otherwise 9". In that case, the "x = sqrt(y/z)"
>>> part is clearly a conditional test.
>>
>> I don't remember 'if' being part of my maths course. Yet yhere must be
>> specialized subfields where it is defined.
>
> How about
>
> sinc(x) = if x = 0 then 1 else sin(x) / x
>
nope, never seen that
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> On 18-11-2009 22:52, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> Similarly, this fragment can appear inside a statement, such as
>>>> "f(x) = 3 if x = sqrt(y/z), otherwise 9". In that case, the "x =
>>>> sqrt(y/z)" part is clearly a conditional test.
>>>
>>> I don't remember 'if' being part of my maths course. Yet yhere must
>>> be specialized subfields where it is defined.
>>
>> How about
>>
>> sinc(x) = if x = 0 then 1 else sin(x) / x
>>
> nope, never seen that
I've seen it as
sinc(x) = 1 if x = 0
sinc(x) = sin(x)/x if x /= 0
I've never seen it written with an else.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Is God willing to prevent phrogams, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing, to prevent phrogams?
Then he is malevolent.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> And some courses would require it for calculating Fourier
> coefficients/transforms, but those weren't challenging integrals. In all
> other courses where, say, a diff eq would crop up, the professor would
> almost always say - "Let's not get distracted by the math - this is an
> engineering course. Here's the solution: You can verify it by plugging it
> back into the diff eq."
Yeh, I guess it depends whether you want to be someone who just uses
pre-existing results to "Engineer" run-of-the-mill stuff, or you actually
want to work with cutting-edge concepts and develop new stuff. Me, I prefer
the latter, but maybe that was just because of the way my degree was
oriented.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> How about
>>>
>>> sinc(x) = if x = 0 then 1 else sin(x) / x
>>>
>> nope, never seen that
>
> I've seen it as
> sinc(x) = 1 if x = 0
> sinc(x) = sin(x)/x if x /= 0
In our math classes we always wrote it just like that, but usually only the
"sinc(x)" once and a curly bracket around the two options IIRC.
> I've never seen it written with an else.
Me neither, that sounds more like a programming language than math notation.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>>> How about
>>>>
>>>> sinc(x) = if x = 0 then 1 else sin(x) / x
>>>>
>>> nope, never seen that
>>
>> I've seen it as
>> sinc(x) = 1 if x = 0
>> sinc(x) = sin(x)/x if x /= 0
>
> In our math classes we always wrote it just like that, but usually only
> the "sinc(x)" once and a curly bracket around the two options IIRC.
Indeed. But you can't really do that with ASCII, so I wrote the nearest
equivilent.
>> I've never seen it written with an else.
>
> Me neither, that sounds more like a programming language than math
> notation.
Well, technically the above *is* a valid Haskell function declaration...
[Or rather, it becomes so if you change "if x = " to "if x == 0" - which
probably proves Andrel's original point.]
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/19/09 02:15, scott wrote:
> pre-existing results to "Engineer" run-of-the-mill stuff, or you
> actually want to work with cutting-edge concepts and develop new stuff.
> Me, I prefer the latter, but maybe that was just because of the way my
> degree was oriented.
Except that in engineering over here, that often requires a Masters
degree. People with bachelor's in engineering rarely do development.
They may play some role in the process, but it's rare that they'll
actually be key people in the design process.
--
I didn't know my husband drank until one day he came home sober.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> pre-existing results to "Engineer" run-of-the-mill stuff, or you
>> actually want to work with cutting-edge concepts and develop new stuff.
>> Me, I prefer the latter, but maybe that was just because of the way my
>> degree was oriented.
>
> Except that in engineering over here, that often requires a Masters
> degree. People with bachelor's in engineering rarely do development. They
> may play some role in the process, but it's rare that they'll actually be
> key people in the design process.
Bachelor Engineering degrees don't really exist in the UK anymore, nearly
all engineering degrees are Masters now. Of course there are non-degree
Engineering qualifications you can do which are probably more suited to the
non-development stuff and not as theoretically based.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/20/09 03:13, scott wrote:
> Bachelor Engineering degrees don't really exist in the UK anymore,
> nearly all engineering degrees are Masters now. Of course there are
> non-degree Engineering qualifications you can do which are probably more
> suited to the non-development stuff and not as theoretically based.
Which was my point all along. In the UK, I'm guessing those technical
degrees (that are "less" than a Bachelor's) is not a rare thing. Over
here, it's quite uncommon. The Bachelor's degree over here fills that
role (and more advanced ones - it's quite broad).
--
Two robins were sitting in a tree. `I'm really hungry`, said the first
one. `Me, too` said the second. `Let's fly down and find some lunch.`
They flew to the ground and found a nice plot of plowed ground full of
worms. They ate and ate and ate and ate `til they could eat no more.
`I'm so full I don't think I can fly back up to the tree`, said the
first one. `Me either. Let's just lay here and bask in the warm sun`,
said the second. `O.K.` said the first. They plopped down, basking in
the sun. No sooner than they had fallen asleep, a big fat tom cat snuck
up and gobbled them up. As he sat washing his face after his meal, he
thought, `I just love baskin` robins.`
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
