3 ms·
> things [] are just easier to reason about when you can see it matches what is on the paper in front of you. I have this sentiment every time I dive into some
by bruce343434 2y ago
> things [] are just easier to reason about when you can see it matches what is on the paper in front of you.
I have this sentiment every time I dive into some "other" programming math notation. Such as (lisp), rpn, infix without precedence, etc. In theory I like it, but then in practice it's just kind of painful.
We humans are entrenched in our bad but default notation!
- roelschroeven 2y agoIs infix notation even that bad? I guess RPN has advantages for use as an input method for calculators, but as an actual algebraic notation? It seems to me it's very cumbersome to perform standard algebra on equations in RPN notation (or prefix notation, for that matter). I can't be sure but as far as I know nobody has using anything other than infix for algebra. Every time I see a text explaining the advantages of RPN, it's always in the context of calculator input.
- 7thaccount 2y agoThere are disadvantages to RPN as well. I read a book on the Forth programming language (also uses RPN) and some calculations that are algebraically simple require pretty bizarre stack shuffling with RPN stacks. I wish I had the source example. It was something pretty standard in a highschool algebra book like the midpoint formula or something like that. The reverse might be true as well in some situations, but I can't recall any examples outside of RPN's historical advantage against old TI calcs in the 80s. Maybe a forth or RPN enthusiast could help.