• rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.eeEnglish
    223·
    9 months ago

    As a software developer, the less ambiguous your notation is, the better it is for everyone involved. Not only will I use brackets, I’ll split my expression into multiple rows and use tabs to make it as readable as humanly possible. And maybe throw a comment or 2 if there’s still some black magic involved

        • Bandicoot_Academic@lemmy.oneEnglish
          10·
          9 months ago

          For some context this is one of the winning entries:

          #include <stdio.h>

          #define N(a) “%”#a"$hhn" #define O(a,b) “%10$”#a"d"N(b) #define U “%10$.*37$d” #define G(a) “%”#a"$s" #define H(a,b) G(a)G(b) #define T(a) a a #define s(a) T(a)T(a) #define A(a) s(a)T(a)a #define n(a) A(a)a #define D(a) n(a)A(a) #define C(a) D(a)a #define R C(C(N(12)G(12))) #define o(a,b,c) C(H(a,a))D(G(a))C(H(b,b)G(b))n(G(b))O(32,c)R #define SS O(78,55)R “\n\033[2J\n%26$s”; #define E(a,b,c,d) H(a,b)G©O(253,11)R G(11)O(255,11)R H(11,d)N(d)O(253,35)R #define S(a,b) O(254,11)H(a,b)N(68)R G(68)O(255,68)N(12)H(12,68)G(67)N(67)

          char* fmt = O(10,39)N(40)N(41)N(42)N(43)N(66)N(69)N(24)O(22,65)O(5,70)O(8,44)N( 45)N(46)N (47)N(48)N( 49)N( 50)N( 51)N(52)N(53 )O( 28, 54)O(5, 55) O(2, 56)O(3,57)O( 4,58 )O(13, 73)O(4, 71 )N( 72)O (20,59 )N(60)N(61)N( 62)N (63)N (64)R R E(1,2, 3,13 )E(4, 5,6,13)E(7,8,9 ,13)E(1,4 ,7,13)E (2,5,8, 13)E( 3,6,9,13)E(1,5, 9,13)E(3 ,5,7,13 )E(14,15, 16,23) E(17,18,19,23)E( 20, 21, 22,23)E (14,17,20,23)E(15, 18,21,23)E(16,19, 22 ,23)E( 14, 18, 22,23)E(16,18,20, 23)R U O(255 ,38)R G ( 38)O( 255,36) R H(13,23)O(255, 11)R H(11,36) O(254 ,36) R G( 36 ) O( 255,36)R S(1,14 )S(2,15)S(3, 16)S(4, 17 )S (5, 18)S(6, 19)S(7,20)S(8, 21)S(9 ,22)H(13,23 )H(36, 67 )N(11)R G(11)""O(255, 25 )R s(C(G(11) ))n (G( 11) )G( 11)N(54)R C( “aa”) s(A( G(25)))T (G(25))N (69)R o (14,1,26)o( 15, 2, 27)o (16,3,28 )o( 17,4, 29)o(18 ,5,30)o(19 ,6,31)o( 20,7,32)o (21,8,33)o (22 ,9, 34)n(C(U) )N( 68)R H( 36,13)G(23) N(11)R C(D( G(11))) D(G(11))G(68)N(68)R G(68)O(49,35)R H(13,23)G(67)N(11)R C(H(11,11)G( 11))A(G(11))C(H(36,36)G(36))s(G(36))O(32,58)R C(D(G(36)))A(G(36))SS

          #define arg d+6,d+8,d+10,d+12,d+14,d+16,d+18,d+20,d+22,0,d+46,d+52,d+48,d+24,d
          +26,d+28,d+30,d+32,d+34,d+36,d+38,d+40,d+50,(scanf(d+126,d+4),d+(6
          -2)+18*(1-d[2]%2)+d[4]*2),d,d+66,d+68,d+70, d+78,d+80,d+82,d+90,d+
          92,d+94,d+97,d+54,d[2],d+2,d+71,d+77,d+83,d+89,d+95,d+72,d+73,d+74
          ,d+75,d+76,d+84,d+85,d+86,d+87,d+88,d+100,d+101,d+96,d+102,d+99,d+
          67,d+69,d+79,d+81,d+91,d+93,d+98,d+103,d+58,d+60,d+98,d+126,d+127,
          d+128,d+129

          char d[538] = {1,0,10,0,10};

          int main() { while(*d) printf(fmt, arg); }

        • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          9 months ago

          Further up the thread, someone mentioned that writing good software is about communicating concepts to people, first and foremost.

          This, code obfuscation, is what it looks like to communicate exclusively to the compiler instead.

        • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.comEnglish
          13·
          9 months ago

          For real though, I have written some truly monstrous operations in Excel.

          What do you mean you want to use Excel to manage everyone’s calendars? And now you want to export that horribly built calendar management spreadsheet to Google Calendar? What do you mean you want the Google Calendar entries automatically formatted based on who is working on a particular day? I mean yes it’s possible but-…

    • dustyData@lemmy.worldEnglish
      65·
      9 months ago

      As a professor said, most programming languages don’t care about readability and whitespace. But we care because humans need it to parse meaning. Thus, write code for people, not for the machine. Always assume that someone with no knowledge of the context will have to debug it, and be kind to them. Because that someone might be you in six months when you have completely forgotten how the code works.

      • zalgotext@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        18·
        9 months ago

        Exactly. You read code way more times than you write it, so it makes all the sense in the world to prioritize readability.

      • oce 🐆@jlai.luEnglish
        7·
        9 months ago

        Python forcing end of line and tabs kinda does. Add Black auto-formatter and it’s pretty good.

        • frezik@midwest.socialEnglish
          1·
          9 months ago

          I’ve seen too many Python devs write out complex statements all on one crammed up line. Including some that are in the main docs.

          Enforced whitespace is just one aspect of readable code. There are many others, and Python is no better at enforcing those than any other language.

          • oce 🐆@jlai.luEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            That would probably make very long lines and black would automatically add returns to line with proper indentations. But it has a a limit for sure. If you chain many list comprehensions it’s going to be a mess.

      • rockerface 🇺🇦@lemm.eeEnglish
        6·
        9 months ago

        Yep, if you’re writing code for a machine, just do it in binary to save compilation time (/s just in case). Also, you in six months will indeed be someone with no knowledge of the context. And every piece of code you think you write for one-time use is guaranteed to be reused every day for the next 5 years

      • snowsuit2654@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        2·
        9 months ago

        Yeah I totally agree. You can minimize and optimize as part of your build procedure/compilation but the source code should be as readable as possible for humans.

    • Quetzalcutlass@lemmy.worldEnglish
      612·
      9 months ago

      I had someone submit a pull request recently that, in addition to their actual changes, also removed every single parenthesis that wasn’t strictly necessary in a file full of 3D math functions. I know it was probably the fault of an autoformatter they used, but I was still the most offended I’ve ever been at a pull request.

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.worldEnglish
      9·
      9 months ago

      I genuinely hate being human for this stuff. So many things have such crazy computational shortcuts, it’s sometimes difficult to remember which part represents reality. Outside of the realm of math, where “imaginary” numbers are still a touch of enigma to me, so many algorithms are based on general assumptions about reality or the specific task, that the programmatic approach NEVER encapsulates the full scope of the problem.

      As in, sometimes if you know EXACTLY how a tool works, you might still have no idea about the significance of that tool. Even in a universe where no one is lazy, and everyone wants to know “why?”, the answers are NOT forthcoming.

    • neidu2@feddit.nlEnglish
      1·
      9 months ago

      As someone who used to code in Lisp, I’m all for excessive paranthesis use.

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      33·
      9 months ago

      Ok but that’s unrelated to putting some numbers and operations in a calculator. No one is going to proofread that. If anything, you simply calculate it again.

    • PoisonedPrisonPanda@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      63·
      9 months ago

      Ok man. Wtf did I just watch…

      I get it. We are here on the somehow dark side of the internet…

      But THIS… without any context. i mean. Im questioning live here man. What do you want to express with that?

      • janNatan@lemmy.mlEnglish
        10·
        9 months ago

        I’m pretty sure it’s just a reference to when the kid types ))<>((

        Btw, it’s not from the dark side of the Internet. This was a very popular video at the time.

          • Qkall@lemmy.mlEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            Somehow that clip is better than the fairly odd movie. I don’t think I could recommend it… But I think of the clip posted all the time. It’s so weird 😂. Some how they figured out creepy, funny, and somehow wholesome at once.

  • MotoAsh@lemmy.worldEnglish
    133·
    9 months ago

    The underlying truth of this joke is: Programming syntax is less confusing than mathematical syntax. There are genuinely ambiguous layouts of syntax in math (to a human reader that hasn’t internalized PEMDAS, anyways) whereas you get a compilation error if ANYTHING is ambiguous in programming. (yes, I am WELL aware of the frustrations of runtime errors)

        • TheOakTree@lemm.eeEnglish
          4·
          9 months ago

          Same as PEMDAS, except:

          Parentheses -> Bracket

          Exponent -> Order

          Multiplication <-> Division

          BODMAS

          • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.caEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            I learned it as “BEDMAS”

            Brackets

            Exponents

            (You can guess the rest)

            But when I learned BEDMAS, my teacher directed us to do implied multiplication before other multiplication/division. Which, as far as I’m aware, is mathematically correct according to the proper order of operations (instead of whatever acronym summary you learned).

            Before I get "umm. Acktually"d … I know that’s not the full picture of the order of operations as it should be in mathematics. But for the limited scope I learned of algebra from highschool, AFAIK, this is correct to the point that I have understanding of. I’m not a mathematician, and I work with computers all day long and they do the math for me when I need to do any of it. So higher understanding in my case is not helpful.

            • TheOakTree@lemm.eeEnglish
              3·
              9 months ago

              Order is often used to describe exponents when talking about functions and other mathematical properties. In a lot of cases, it’s also equivalent to a degree. For example, a function y = x² - 9 is a second-order/degree polynomial.

              Alternatively, one could find a second-order rate of a reaction, which means the rate of reaction is proportional to the square of a solution’s concentration.

              • TheOakTree@lemm.eeEnglish
                4·
                9 months ago

                You have the right idea, and you are right in some regards. Generally the order of magnitude is an order of 10. That is, 1350 could be represented as 1.350×10³, so the order of magnitude is the third order of 10, which is 10³ (i.e. some value x×1000).

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.worldEnglish
        23·
        9 months ago

        I mean … yea. The exact problem is math is not taught correctly. Order of operations make total logical sense for what the operations are doing.

        The problem only arises when people don’t come to all of the appropriate conclusions on their own.

    • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      9 months ago

      Also: sometimes, a mathematician just has to invent some concept or syntax to convey something unconventional. The specific use of subscript/superscript, whatever ‘phi’ is being used for, etc. on whatever paper you’re reading doesn’t have to correlate to how other work uses the same concepts. It’s bad form, but sometimes its needed, and if useful enough is added to the general canon of what we call “math”. Meanwhile, you can encapsulate and obfuscate things in software, sure, but you can always get down to the bedrock of what the language supports; there’s no inventing anything new.

    • ByGourou@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      81·
      9 months ago

      Isn’t the “-” order of operations the same as a multiply ? I think I learned powers take priority over the “-” so your calculator would be right.
      But either way if it can cause confusion you should use parentheses.

      • TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyzEnglish
        52·
        9 months ago

        Every calculator I’ve used has separate negative and subtraction keys for this purpose. There is no order of operations to follow, it’s just a squaring a number

        • ByGourou@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          41·
          9 months ago

          I learned negative as being a separate operation where we need to apply the order of operations. I think it was something like : -2 is a diminutive for -1x2 so it uses the order of operations of a multiplication.
          My calculator is the official one used in schools in France (ti-83 premium ce) and it says -2^2 = -4 with the negative key. I don’t think it would make a mistake in such a simple concept.

          But whatever these concepts can change depending on the field, country, level of education. What I mean is : it’s unclear, so use parentheses. So (-2)^2 or -(2^2) are the correct ways to write it.

    • Ultraviolet@lemmy.worldEnglish
      41·
      9 months ago

      I would never write -n². Either ‐(n²) or (-n)². Order of operations shouldn’t be some sort of gotcha to trick people into misinterpreting you, it’s the intuitive reading of a well constructed mathematical expression.

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.comEnglish
    61·
    9 months ago

    I’ve never seen a calculator that had bracket keys but didn’t implement the conventional order of operations.

    But anyway, I’m on Team RPN.

  • ooli@lemmy.worldEnglish
    5·
    9 months ago

    I just used the calc on window… it cannot respect order of operation. Any simple calculator from 1980 was better than that

  • EunieIsTheBus@feddit.deEnglish
    4·
    9 months ago

    I recall that there is a myriad of memes of the form ‘what is 4-2*3’ under which there is always a never ending discussion of confidently incorrect dumbasses denying the existence of the multiplication before addition rule.

    So your suspicion is at least not unreasonable