4 ms·
I think we might be arguing different points. I'm not saying use different variable names from the canonical math version - I'm saying the canonical math versio
by kennywinker 5y ago
I think we might be arguing different points. I'm not saying use different variable names from the canonical math version - I'm saying the canonical math version should use variable names instead of symbols.
So per your point - I'm not qualified to re-define mathematical notation so I won't go very far with it, but taking the formula you mentioned, Gaussian distribution density function (not focusing on the fact that I had to re-write it in pseudocode to represent it in a text format):
f(x) = 1/(σ * sqrt(2*pi))*e^(-1/2*((x-μ)/σ)^2)
I would suggest a couple changes:
- change σ to `standard_deviation`, or if you don't like snake_case I could handle `stddev`
- change μ to `mean`.
- change x to `input` - there may be a better name than that, and x is pretty widely used in math so I'm not married to this one.
- e should probably stay the same - e means e no matter the mathematical context, while μ means different things in different fields of math.
f(input) = 1/(standard_deviation * sqrt(2*pi))*e^(-1/2*((input-mean)/standard_deviation)^2)
This doesn't make it more or less readable, but it does mean I don't have to _just know_ or look up that μ is `mean` to parse it.
- kaba0 5y agoI accept your position, and perhaps my examples for a difficult formula was not difficult enough — my point is more along the line that the underlying structure of a formula becomes more easily visible with shorter symbols — and for syntactic manipulation one can more easily see patterns emerge.