4 ms·

If the maximum size of your number type is anywhere within 10x of your largest values you should definitely be using a larger number type. It’s just a way to wr

by woah 5y ago

If the maximum size of your number type is anywhere within 10x of your largest values you should definitely be using a larger number type. It’s just a way to write down a number. It’s like getting mad about the fact that negative numbers when written by hand require an extra character

chriswarbo 5y ago
> It’s like getting mad about the fact that negative numbers when written by hand require an extra character. Now that you mention it, that convention does make me mad. Not because I have to write an extra character, but due to operations getting mixed-up based on implied context. For example: Unary + is implicit: 3 = +3 Addition is written as juxtaposition: +2+5 = add(+2, +5) = +7. The first number can have an implicit sign, e.g. 2+5 = +2+5 "Subtraction" is a redundant operation; it's just addition involving a negative number: 8-3 = +8-3 = add(+8, -3) = +5. The nice thing about this perspective is that subtraction commutes: +8-3 = -3+8. What's annoying is that we also take juxtaposition to mean multiplication, and this flip-flops depending on implicit characters like unary '+'. For example: -8-3 = add(-8, -3) -8+3 = add(-8, +3) ab = multiply(a, b) 2a = multiply(2, a) a2 = multiply(2, a) (non-idiomatic) -2a = multiply(-2, a) a-2 = add(a, -2) This isn't just a problem when mixing variables with literals, since juxtaposition of literals also means multiplication (as long as they parse to separate numbers), e.g. '13' is a two-digit number, but: (1)(3) = multiply(1, 3) (-1)(-3) = multiply(-1, -3) -1-3 = add(-1, -3) -1(-3) = multiply(-1, -3) (-1)-3 = add(-1, -3) Note that we can do the same thing for multiplication and division, if we have a uniary reciprocal operator, e.g. ÷2 = 1/2. That way, division is just multiplication involving an inverse number, which commutes; e.g. 6÷2 = 6×÷2 = multiply(6, ÷2) = multiply(6, 1/2) = multiply(1/2, 6) = ÷2×6. This seems weirder than the case of addition/subtraction, probably because we already have the horizontal-bar notation for division, which seems even nicer. Note that the "÷" character itself is simply an inline approximation of the horizontal-bar notation (with placeholders above and below); the "foo/bar" notation is a more direct inline approximation (no placeholders, just 'tipping' the bar). Interestingly we don't use "bar\foo" to mean the same thing.
- potiuper 5y ago
  Partial application of the binary grouping operators with the first operand implicit does not have to stop at division: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25278021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25278021

by woah 5y ago

chriswarbo 5y ago

> It’s like getting mad about the fact that negative numbers when written by hand require an extra character. Now that you mention it, that convention does make me mad. Not because I have to write an extra character, but due to operations getting mixed-up based on implied context. For example: Unary + is implicit: 3 = +3 Addition is written as juxtaposition: +2+5 = add(+2, +5) = +7. The first number can have an implicit sign, e.g. 2+5 = +2+5 "Subtraction" is a redundant operation; it's just addition involving a negative number: 8-3 = +8-3 = add(+8, -3) = +5. The nice thing about this perspective is that subtraction commutes: +8-3 = -3+8. What's annoying is that we also take juxtaposition to mean multiplication, and this flip-flops depending on implicit characters like unary '+'. For example: -8-3 = add(-8, -3) -8+3 = add(-8, +3) ab = multiply(a, b) 2a = multiply(2, a) a2 = multiply(2, a) (non-idiomatic) -2a = multiply(-2, a) a-2 = add(a, -2) This isn't just a problem when mixing variables with literals, since juxtaposition of literals also means multiplication (as long as they parse to separate numbers), e.g. '13' is a two-digit number, but: (1)(3) = multiply(1, 3) (-1)(-3) = multiply(-1, -3) -1-3 = add(-1, -3) -1(-3) = multiply(-1, -3) (-1)-3 = add(-1, -3) Note that we can do the same thing for multiplication and division, if we have a uniary reciprocal operator, e.g. ÷2 = 1/2. That way, division is just multiplication involving an inverse number, which commutes; e.g. 6÷2 = 6×÷2 = multiply(6, ÷2) = multiply(6, 1/2) = multiply(1/2, 6) = ÷2×6. This seems weirder than the case of addition/subtraction, probably because we already have the horizontal-bar notation for division, which seems even nicer. Note that the "÷" character itself is simply an inline approximation of the horizontal-bar notation (with placeholders above and below); the "foo/bar" notation is a more direct inline approximation (no placeholders, just 'tipping' the bar). Interestingly we don't use "bar\foo" to mean the same thing.

potiuper 5y ago
Partial application of the binary grouping operators with the first operand implicit does not have to stop at division: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25278021 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25278021