this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
801 points (96.1% liked)

Memes

45997 readers
2571 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
801
6÷2(1+2) (programming.dev)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

https://zeta.one/viral-math/

I wrote a (very long) blog post about those viral math problems and am looking for feedback, especially from people who are not convinced that the problem is ambiguous.

It's about a 30min read so thank you in advance if you really take the time to read it, but I think it's worth it if you joined such discussions in the past, but I'm probably biased because I wrote it :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just because they say one type of multiplication has precedence doesn’t make it so.

It's not that their words have magic power. It's that it's just an arbitrary notational convention in the first place.

We’ve already shown how using parenthesis negates that concept, and matches the output of the method that doesn’t give implicit multiplication precedence

Using parentheses doesn't "negate" or "match" anything. (a * b) + c and a * (b + c) are two different expressions specifically because of the use of parentheses, regardless of the relative order of the * and + without parentheses.

[–] LemmysMum 2 points 1 year ago

You're right, I had that epiphany and and updated my comment. Thanks for helping me educate myself.