On 08/05/2015 07:32 PM, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 August 2015 at 17:12:29 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
On Wednesday, 5 August 2015 at 15:58:28 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The point is that '+' for string concatenation is no more of an 'idiot
thing' than '~'.
My point is that it is. String concatenation is not commutative.
Ok, good point. Except that '+' in a programming language is not the
mathematical '+'. Why define '+' as strictly commutative operation and
not more generally as an abstract binary operation, considering the
middle dot is unavailable? Or, if we want to stick to the math
notation, then '*' would be more appropriate than the idiot thing '~'.
Nobody want to stay in the math world. Not that math are worthless, but
it has this tendency to make simple things absurdly complex by requiring
you to learn a whole area of math to understand the introduction.
I assume the set of examples you are generalizing this from has
cardinality close to one? Anyway, it seems like an exaggeration.
This is commonly referred as the monad curse: once you understand what a
monad is, you loose all capacity to explain it.
I'm not buying it.
In fact, Most developers
have used some sort of monad, but only a very small portion know they
were using one or can explain you what it is.
...
Which isn't surprising. This isn't a very useful name in their (quite
specific) use cases.
Mathematical language is geared toward generality and correctness, not
practicality. That makes sens in the context of math, that do not in the
context of every day programming.
I don't see what you are trying to get at here, but I guess it is almost
entirely unrelated to choosing a notation for string concatenation.
