3 ms·
Do you ever feel like you are missing out on something by skipping the proofs?
by YuriNiyazov 16y ago
Do you ever feel like you are missing out on something by skipping the proofs?
- billswift 16y agoIf you think you may be missing out on something, then you read that proof. Reading all of the proofs is usually a waste of time. (Not always a waste, sometimes they are all relevant, but usually.)
- _delirium 16y agoUsually no. :) The proofs are often pretty mechanical and proceed the way similar proofs do, if you've already read a few in that area (PLs proofs are even worse, a totally mechanical exercise in pages of structural induction). I actually wish there were more areas where they were just saved for tech reports and appendices instead of breaking up the flow of the main paper. When papers are 75%+ proofs, the nice nuggets are parceled out so slowly that it's pretty frustrating. I do often read English sketches of why something works, if a paper includes them--- text that points to the core insight of why we're able to do something, which theorems or constructions allow it, which problems you might think would exist are actually avoided, etc. But I rarely need to see all the detailed symbol-pushing.