3 ms·
In practical implementations we call this code write-only. It's funny that you bring up mathematical notation because mathematical notation is completely optim
by Locke1689 16y ago
In practical implementations we call this code write-only.
It's funny that you bring up mathematical notation because mathematical notation is completely optimized for write-only. Mathematics is so obsessed with one letter variable names that they had to gather letters from other alphabets to continue their opaque tradition.
- seanb 16y agoI find mathematical notation to be very read-friendly. Reading a paper from an unfamiliar field can be tough, as knowledge of the standard notation is typically assumed (as is the case when reading code from an unfamiliar programming language). Mathematical "code" isn't usually meant to be read without the surrounding variable and notation declarations, for example "Let x be ..." or "where • is the ... operation". If those are provided, short variable names and terse notation allow for the intent to be presented clearly, without it being obscured by line-length restrictions and a limited number of generic constructs (eg. for-loops instead of the summation operator). That said, I'm finding this C implementation of J to be pretty cryptic. Of course, that's no reason to dismiss the J programming language itself.