3 ms·

No it doesn’t. English is as algorithmic as math. If there is a formula x = x^1 + y you wouldn’t say ; no good it implies z is also the same. You would not bec

No it doesn’t. English is as algorithmic as math. If there is a formula x = x^1 + y you wouldn’t say ; no good it implies z is also the same. You would not because it says nothing about z.

Al-Khwarizmi 2y ago
If you have a specification for a program saying "input: variables x and y, output: z holds x+y", you would probably be annoyed if someone coded "x=0; y=0; z=0", though. Just playing devil's advocate, I think the headline is not bad (could be less ambiguous, but sacrificing brevity)
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  Figured someone would have to get specific. Lol. Have you read The Overstory? I recommend it, it’s a great modern novel. “What they do?”
yathern 2y ago
> English is as algorithmic as math Ain't no way! This "illogical" double negative shows how English is not at all like algebra. English is not a set of formal rules - there is no formal authority on the language. The rules that exist are derived from how English is commonly used - descriptive rather than prescriptive. This is why dictionaries are constantly adding new (sometimes annoying) words, and the Chicago Manual of Style is on its 18th version. For example, I was taught that "they" could never describe a singular person, and one should assume "he", "she" or "the suspect". Not so anymore [1]. The language, its constructs, and implicit rules are always changing, regardless (and irregardless[2]) of how you criticize those that speak it. [1] https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/help-tools/what-s-new.html https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/help-tools/what-s-new.h... [2] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/irregardless https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/irreg...
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  [flagged]
gosub100 2y ago
[flagged]
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  [flagged]

3 ms·

No it doesn’t. English is as algorithmic as math. If there is a formula x = x^1 + y you wouldn’t say ; no good it implies z is also the same. You would not bec

by 52-6F-62 2y ago

No it doesn’t. English is as algorithmic as math. If there is a formula x = x^1 + y you wouldn’t say ; no good it implies z is also the same. You would not because it says nothing about z.

Al-Khwarizmi 2y ago
If you have a specification for a program saying "input: variables x and y, output: z holds x+y", you would probably be annoyed if someone coded "x=0; y=0; z=0", though. Just playing devil's advocate, I think the headline is not bad (could be less ambiguous, but sacrificing brevity)
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  Figured someone would have to get specific. Lol. Have you read The Overstory? I recommend it, it’s a great modern novel. “What they do?”
yathern 2y ago
> English is as algorithmic as math Ain't no way! This "illogical" double negative shows how English is not at all like algebra. English is not a set of formal rules - there is no formal authority on the language. The rules that exist are derived from how English is commonly used - descriptive rather than prescriptive. This is why dictionaries are constantly adding new (sometimes annoying) words, and the Chicago Manual of Style is on its 18th version. For example, I was taught that "they" could never describe a singular person, and one should assume "he", "she" or "the suspect". Not so anymore [1]. The language, its constructs, and implicit rules are always changing, regardless (and irregardless[2]) of how you criticize those that speak it. [1] https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/help-tools/what-s-new.html https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/help-tools/what-s-new.h... [2] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/irregardless https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/irreg...
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  [flagged]
gosub100 2y ago
[flagged]
- 52-6F-62 2y ago
  [flagged]