Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

Mathematical objects

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-08 20:40

There is no mathematics in a clock. I have devised new, mathematical clock. Every second, a new clock will be created with the hands in a different position.

There is no mathematics in a gun. When you pull the trigger on my ``mathematical gun'' an object with a bullet hole will appear, together with another copy of the gun where the bullet has been fired. The original object and gun will be unchanged.

Driving a car has nothing to do with mathematics. Turning the steering wheel should create a new car moving in a different direction. The fuel tank of this new car would have slightly less fuel than the previous car. This car will be on a new road which is in a slightly different relative position to the car.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-08 20:45

And the old clock/gun/car is destroyed, and you cannot retrieve it again without time travel. We get it, Asimov, no need to waste a whole new thread about it.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-08 20:51

I don't like seconde morte complications.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-09 9:01

But is it natural?

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-09 10:25

>>1
There is no mathematics in a clock. I have devised new, mathematical clock. Every second, a new clock will be created with the hands in a different position.

Congratulations on reinventing Islam, lol. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occasionalism

(Come to think about it, it's no coincidence algebra and algorithms look the way they do, both concepts having been invented by Muslim scholars.)

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-09 18:41

>>5
So functional programming is actually Islamic programming?

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-09 18:57

>>6
If those books are in agreement with the lambda calculus, we have no need of them. And if they are opposed to the lambda calculus, destroy them!

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-10 3:22

Driving a car has nothing to do with mathematics
But... my other car is a cdr!

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-10 5:02

>>8
Terrible!

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-10 8:28

>>1
Given a perspective that time is arbitrarily traversable, or is an observable dimension, or that the multiverse splits on decisions, that's a reasonable description of what happens in reality.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-10 12:09

>>10
Check' em

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-10 13:19

>>11
Checking dubs has nothing to do with mathematics. The dubs you get are not the same dubs that appear in my browser instance.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-11 12:31

>>12
No. The pixels you see on your string are not the same pixels I see on my screen, but neither of those are the dubs we are talking about, but merely refer to the eternal mathematical object.

It's like if you have 11 apples, you don't have the 11 as such, and if you viciously attack one of the apples with a fireman's axe, you are not going to damage the number 11.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-11 16:23

>>13
That is some Platonist garbage right there.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-11 16:56

>>13
The number 11 is already damaged because of the dubsposter.
666 was perfectly normal, until Christians made it evil.
13 is now unlucky. 420 blaze it. 4 means Death.etc
People can CHANGE numbers. Its meme magic but it works.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-12 2:55

>>1
Double buffering is never used in programming, even outside of functional programming. That would be dumb, amirite?

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-12 13:58

>>16
This has nothing to do with double-buffering, you smork.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-12 21:38

>>17
It does, and you're too stupid to realize the equivalence.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-12 21:56

>>18
You are too stupid to realise they are not equivalent. It is a stretched metaphor at best.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-12 23:40

>>1
Satire is the lowest form of comedy and the lowest form of wit.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-13 3:24

>>19
Traversal from one state to the next by creating a new copy of the data. If that's a stretch for you, I pity your mental capacity.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-13 5:06

>>20
Satire is the lowest form of comedy. Any idiot can make ironic comparisons, extended metaphors, and humorous allegories. It takes real intelligence to do observational comedy.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-13 8:03

>>21
They are still note equivalent.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-13 11:06

>>21
The traversed state space of one execution of a program in FP can be stored, represented and replayed as a sequence of delta modifications, each representing the current expansion in the ruleset the program represents, as a property of FP itself, and implemented within the program.
Double-buffering involves desstroying time N-1 in order to render one frame into the future; you cannot "scrub" arbitrarily through time as in FP because you only have two frames.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-13 12:13

>>24
Obviously. But >>1 was making some stupid remark about creating a new state instead of mutating the old. Graphics buffers, physics states, databases, etc, nearly everything performs some form of buffering of creating a new output instead of mutating the inputs. It's a super common metaphor, and >>1 thinks it's some weird FP-only incantation.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-13 18:53

>>25
Those are all views on the effects created by their inputs, of course rendering a triangle will not modify the triangle itself in any way. It's not a metaphor, it's the only sane way of implementing anything where the type of the input is different to the type of the output.
Anyway, you are interpreting >>1 incorrectly. >>1 is saying "FP is a bad metaphor for the world", and you are reading "only FP creates new states of things like this".

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-13 19:23

>>26
Types don't have anything to do with it. What in Jahannam are you blathering about?

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-14 1:44

logic orders function
logic orders procedure
the universe is ordered by laws not math

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-14 2:02

>>28
No knoblicker, math is the language the laws are written in.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-14 15:13

>>26
Um, every example (both mine and >>1) is about generating an output of the same type as the input, just creating a new instance instead of mutating the old.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-14 20:42

>>27
If a function modifies its input, then the input is part of the output.
Conversely, if it does not modify its input, then there is nothing to modify that is the same type as its input. Thus, all output must be created, rather than being a modification of the input (tautologically so). In addition, type theory is homomorphic to pretty much everything to be discussed in CS theory.

>>30
Each example is arguably a left-fold over the input and the current state; the state may be part of the input but it is not all of the input. I still think you are misunderstanding and/or I don't see what point you are trying to make.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-14 20:52

>>31
You certainly used a lot of words to not answer the question.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-14 21:02

>>32
I explained exactly how types are related. Are you feeling particularly facetious today, or are you just thick?

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 9:21

>>33
You're wanking on over functional programming semantics, when the initial question was very simple copy vs mutate. The modeled implicit state is not part of any of the discussion except your tangents.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 12:52

>>30
Um, every example (both mine and >>1) is about generating an output of the same type as the input, just creating a new instance instead of mutating the old.

(not the >>31 wanker) So let's talk about Islam again. You assume that you have a function Clock -> Clock that increments time say by one second. A Muslim scholar would point out that you could just as well consider a function Time -> Clock that construct a brand new clock as it exists at a given moment of time.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 18:43

>>34
Follow the backreferences to >>16 where the discussion becomes about FP, so I'm not wanking over anything except your withered corpse. State is intrinsic to copy-vs-mutate anyway, so that is what the thread is inescapably about, apparently without you realising it.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 19:02

>>36
Switches are intrinsic to state machines, so that is what this thread is now about.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 19:05

>>37
Continuation is intrinsic to switches, so that's what this thread is about now

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 19:06

>>37
Those are long words for an anus.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 20:11

>>37
There are plenty of ways to write a state machine with no switch style statement at all, especially if performance is an issue.

Name: Anonymous 2016-03-15 20:46

>>40
Yep, there's solenoids, vacuum tubes, and transistors.
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode + RSS -