30 ms·
For some concepts that can be expressed in both code and math, I prefer the code notation because I can run it, and also make small tweaks and see what happens.
by cousin_it 12y ago
For some concepts that can be expressed in both code and math, I prefer the code notation because I can run it, and also make small tweaks and see what happens. For example, I got a better understanding of Löb's theorem [1] by translating the proof into Haskell [2].
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%B6b's_theorem#Modal_Proof_of_L.C3.B6b.27s_theorem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%B6b's_theorem#Modal_Proof_...
[2] http://lesswrong.com/lw/l0d/a_proof_of_l%C3%B6bs_theorem_in_haskell/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/l0d/a_proof_of_l%C3%B6bs_theorem_in_...
- RBerenguel 12y agoIf it can be coded, I prefer having both, or implementing the code. It helps in understanding the algorithm behind. But maths is much larger than what can be coded, or is useful in code, so the only thing left is playing with toy examples ("coding" when working with really weird stuff.) I'd love to see more of APL (and a "larger" set of APL functions, actually) in use. The idea of a notation we could run directly is/was awesome.