5 ms·

Sure but I can load any program with that statement into my editor and mouse over each word to view the details or hit F12 to see the definition :p If any of t

Sure but I can load any program with that statement into my editor and mouse over each word to view the details or hit F12 to see the definition :p If any of those symbols are undefined, the editor or compiler will tell me.

Jtsummers 4y ago
Can you? What language is it?
- tromp 4y ago
  Looks like Haskell [1]. Other languages may have a predefined function map as well, but few have Haskell's juxtaposition notation for application. [1] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.17.0.0/docs/Data-List.html#g:2 https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.17.0.0/docs/Data-...
  - Jtsummers 4y ago
    Without context you can assume it is. But you can’t know, which is my point.
    - squeaky-clean 4y ago
      Without context it's not a running program and I don't really care about single lines of code in isolation. It's just as bad as math symbols written in isolation of any context but that's my point. > If any of those symbols are undefined, the editor or compiler will tell me. I'm pretty sure every single language in the world will tell me that statement in isolation will not compile.
      - Jtsummers 4y ago
        > Without context it's not a running program and I don't really care about single lines of code in isolation. It's just as bad as math symbols written in isolation of any context but that's my point. We are either in violent agreement or you are failing to actually convey your meaning. To take a step back: The original commenter complained about not being able to parse arbitrary expressions. I responded by pointing out that that's not a math specific thing, and that every language has this problem if there is no context. My overall point being that with context that "arbitrary" math expression would become less arbitrary as the context provides meaning which permits parsing. Since they seemed to be a programmer (or have some familiarity with it, asking for a strongly typed language) I provided an expression you might find in some program, and presented it without any context, that was intended as an analogy to their situation with math. Again, trying to emphasize that you need context to get meaning. You seem to be agreeing with me (you need context for the expression to have any meaning), but your comment itself comes off as argumentative. So what's your disagreement with my point?

Jtsummers 4y ago

Can you? What language is it?

tromp 4y ago
Looks like Haskell [1]. Other languages may have a predefined function map as well, but few have Haskell's juxtaposition notation for application. [1] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.17.0.0/docs/Data-List.html#g:2 https://hackage.haskell.org/package/base-4.17.0.0/docs/Data-...
- Jtsummers 4y ago
  Without context you can assume it is. But you can’t know, which is my point.
  - squeaky-clean 4y ago
    Without context it's not a running program and I don't really care about single lines of code in isolation. It's just as bad as math symbols written in isolation of any context but that's my point. > If any of those symbols are undefined, the editor or compiler will tell me. I'm pretty sure every single language in the world will tell me that statement in isolation will not compile.
    - Jtsummers 4y ago
      > Without context it's not a running program and I don't really care about single lines of code in isolation. It's just as bad as math symbols written in isolation of any context but that's my point. We are either in violent agreement or you are failing to actually convey your meaning. To take a step back: The original commenter complained about not being able to parse arbitrary expressions. I responded by pointing out that that's not a math specific thing, and that every language has this problem if there is no context. My overall point being that with context that "arbitrary" math expression would become less arbitrary as the context provides meaning which permits parsing. Since they seemed to be a programmer (or have some familiarity with it, asking for a strongly typed language) I provided an expression you might find in some program, and presented it without any context, that was intended as an analogy to their situation with math. Again, trying to emphasize that you need context to get meaning. You seem to be agreeing with me (you need context for the expression to have any meaning), but your comment itself comes off as argumentative. So what's your disagreement with my point?