Newest at the top
| 2025-10-06 06:45:31 +0200 | <jreicher> | Honestly I didn't know APL had that. But I was aware of Iverson's other work on notation. |
| 2025-10-06 06:43:51 +0200 | <dcpagan> | jreicher: Overloading the obelus ("รท") for the reciprocal seems like a good idea; ISO 80000-2 has deprecated its use for division, so I may as well overload it to mean reciprocal for my personal notation. |
| 2025-10-06 06:41:31 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-10-06 06:40:42 +0200 | Googulator4 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-03fa-5967-6f2a-1e2d-f05a.pool6.digikabel.hu) |
| 2025-10-06 06:40:37 +0200 | Googulator30 | (~Googulato@2a01-036d-0106-03fa-5967-6f2a-1e2d-f05a.pool6.digikabel.hu) (Quit: Client closed) |
| 2025-10-06 06:40:37 +0200 | peterbecich | (~Thunderbi@47-149-198-150.fdr01.slbh.ca.ip.frontiernet.net) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) |
| 2025-10-06 06:38:22 +0200 | <EvanR> | just notation (?) |
| 2025-10-06 06:38:05 +0200 | <EvanR> | not that that was considered "the numerator" |
| 2025-10-06 06:37:31 +0200 | <EvanR> | for some reason it wasn't proper to put anything other than one in the numerator |
| 2025-10-06 06:36:48 +0200 | <EvanR> | spookily similar to today's notation |
| 2025-10-06 06:36:31 +0200 | <EvanR> | | over numeral for whatever number was the reciprocol of that number |
| 2025-10-06 06:36:15 +0200 | <dcpagan> | That's nothing like how bc parses expressions. |
| 2025-10-06 06:36:06 +0200 | <EvanR> | a big ass line between two expressions to denote a fraction was pioneered by the egyptians if you squint hard enough |
| 2025-10-06 06:34:56 +0200 | <dcpagan> | Standard mathematical notation is cracked. |
| 2025-10-06 06:34:42 +0200 | <dcpagan> | https://raptros.com/blog/2019-obelus/ |
| 2025-10-06 06:34:37 +0200 | <dcpagan> | I recently took a glance at ISO 80000-2 and discovered that the international standard parses the solidus ("/") divide operator with a very low precedence to denote fractional notation, and split the whole expression into numerator and denominator. |
| 2025-10-06 06:34:33 +0200 | litharge` | (litharge@libera/bot/litharge) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-10-06 06:34:29 +0200 | <jreicher> | ...fairly sure... |
| 2025-10-06 06:34:22 +0200 | <jreicher> | https://aplwiki.com/wiki/Reciprocal same idea, basically (fairly Iverson was also fussy about notation) |
| 2025-10-06 06:34:06 +0200 | litharge` | (litharge@libera/bot/litharge) litharge |
| 2025-10-06 06:31:40 +0200 | <EvanR> | saving you two characters |
| 2025-10-06 06:31:25 +0200 | <EvanR> | pretty sure I've seen a function called "inv" somewhere |
| 2025-10-06 06:30:50 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 256 seconds) |
| 2025-10-06 06:30:42 +0200 | <EvanR> | enjoy |
| 2025-10-06 06:30:40 +0200 | <EvanR> | recip |
| 2025-10-06 06:30:38 +0200 | <EvanR> | we have it |
| 2025-10-06 06:29:53 +0200 | <Leary> | dcpagan: Just write `recip` or `invert` or `inverse` and be done with it. It doesn't matter if it isn't standard if it can be understood at a glance. |
| 2025-10-06 06:28:48 +0200 | <jreicher> | Mathematicians don't usually write parsers. And I'm not joking; I think that's the real difference in what you're doing. Means you have literals for the elements. |
| 2025-10-06 06:27:20 +0200 | <dcpagan> | I have Serge Lang's Algebra with me right now, and even he uses (^-1). |
| 2025-10-06 06:26:44 +0200 | <jreicher> | When you first asked your question I grabbed my copy of Concrete Mathematics. I thought if anyone was going to be fussy about notation, Knuth would be... |
| 2025-10-06 06:26:17 +0200 | <dcpagan> | Which is why the lack of a sane unary prefix for the reciprocal so vexes me. |
| 2025-10-06 06:26:09 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) merijn |
| 2025-10-06 06:25:48 +0200 | <EvanR> | dennis ritchie's phd thesis? then it's canon |
| 2025-10-06 06:25:39 +0200 | <dcpagan> | I deliberatively took out the minus and divide operators in my monad to base it on abstract algebraic terms. |
| 2025-10-06 06:24:38 +0200 | <dcpagan> | That looks like a partial obelus. |
| 2025-10-06 06:23:50 +0200 | <jreicher> | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monus |
| 2025-10-06 06:23:23 +0200 | <dcpagan> | What's a monus? |
| 2025-10-06 06:23:14 +0200 | <jreicher> | EvanR: yeah I've come across monus with Church numerals. |
| 2025-10-06 06:23:11 +0200 | <dcpagan> | Divide is the right inverse partial group operator of the field. |
| 2025-10-06 06:22:46 +0200 | <dcpagan> | Algebraically speaking, the minus operator is the right inverse additive group operator. |
| 2025-10-06 06:22:20 +0200 | <dcpagan> | But I primarily wrote this sandbox to grok how delimited continuations manipulate computations by designing a simple field monad to structure those computations. |
| 2025-10-06 06:22:14 +0200 | <EvanR> | monus |
| 2025-10-06 06:22:06 +0200 | <EvanR> | jreicher, there exists abstraction "monoid with minus operation" |
| 2025-10-06 06:21:11 +0200 | <dcpagan> | Omitting units would require parsing 0's and 1's into their respective units, and reformatting the format to an histomorphism to peer deeper into the recursive structure. |
| 2025-10-06 06:19:56 +0200 | <jreicher> | I quite like your idea of /2, /3, etc. It's got some solid parallels. 0 is the additive identity, and we omit zero in 0-3, and omit both the zero and the operator in 3-0. 1 is the multiplicative identity, and if we omit both the 1 and the operator in 3/1, it's a solid parallel to omit the number in /3 |
| 2025-10-06 06:18:55 +0200 | <dcpagan> | My delimited continuation program prints this: "(* (* 3 /2) (* 5 /2))" |
| 2025-10-06 06:18:33 +0200 | <dcpagan> | And I need to format these field expressions to see how delimited continuations manipulate expressions. |
| 2025-10-06 06:18:00 +0200 | trickard_ | (~trickard@cpe-49-98-47-163.wireline.com.au) |
| 2025-10-06 06:17:47 +0200 | trickard_ | (~trickard@cpe-49-98-47-163.wireline.com.au) (Read error: Connection reset by peer) |
| 2025-10-06 06:15:12 +0200 | merijn | (~merijn@host-vr.cgnat-g.v4.dfn.nl) (Ping timeout: 260 seconds) |