3 ms·
Why should we cater to the lowest common denominator? If we did it your way, we increase friction for the people most likely to use, read and edit this code. Ju
by patrick451 5y ago
Why should we cater to the lowest common denominator? If we did it your way, we increase friction for the people most likely to use, read and edit this code. Just like the written word, code has a target audience. If you want to call that gatekeeping or some other putative pejorative, find by me.
- 127 5y agoIt's fine if it's only for hard core mathematicians. Use a disclaimer front and center next time: NOT MEANT FOR MUGGLES. (Seriously talking: From an educational point of view, lowest common deminator is exactly what you want, as long as you can communicate the entire concept effectively)
- jstx1 5y ago> Why should we cater to the lowest common denominator? The options aren't just complete beginner vs math PhD though. Imagine an experienced software developer who has written these kinds of algorithms in other languages and has never used latex. That's the kind of person you're also keeping out. Are they "the lowest common denominator"? I also don't know why you assumed that the people who are most likely to use this code like this are automatically people who already know the glyphs. It's gatekeeping not just because there is barrier to entry. It's because that barrier is artificial, unnecessary and comes with a smug feeling of superiority (you aren't the first person to use "lowest common denominator" in this thread).
- patrick451 5y agoFrankly, if you don't know the glyphs, you almost certainly have no business using the code. Basic notation is table stakes. I learned this stuff (yes, the latex) as an undergrad, and I wasn't even a math major.