Post Reply 
A case against the x<>y key
05-11-2015, 05:07 AM
Post: #35
RE: A case against the x<>y key
(05-11-2015 04:18 AM)Les Bell Wrote:  What I meant is that it's ambiguous in the sense that it requires reference to a set of rules for precedence and associativity

Sure. That's what makes the expression unambiguous. It's more convenient to write \(ax^2+bx+c\) instead of \(((a\times (x^2))+(b\times x))+c\).

Quote:which it seems not everyone knows or agrees on

If unsure about the convention you can still use parentheses to make the expression unambiguous.

Quote:if variations between programming language are any indication.

I don't see how programming languages have anything to do with a mathematical expression like \(-9^{2^3}\). How would you even use that in a program?

Quote:RPN is complete, by comparison - press \(y^x\) and it executes immediately.

There are probably good reasons to use infix notation for mathematical expressions. But whether you use prefix-, infix- or postfix notation: they are all equivalent and unambiguous.

Cheers
Thomas
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Messages In This Thread
A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-09-2015, 10:49 PM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-10-2015, 12:56 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-10-2015, 10:25 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-10-2015, 10:37 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-10-2015, 10:43 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-10-2015, 02:32 PM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-10-2015, 03:51 PM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-11-2015, 12:09 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-11-2015, 12:24 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-11-2015, 12:20 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Tugdual - 05-10-2015, 04:06 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - d b - 05-10-2015, 05:16 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-10-2015, 10:59 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-10-2015, 09:37 PM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-11-2015, 03:39 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-11-2015, 09:41 PM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-11-2015, 04:18 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Thomas Klemm - 05-11-2015 05:07 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-11-2015, 06:10 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - RMollov - 05-11-2015, 09:49 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-11-2015, 10:27 PM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - hansklav - 05-17-2015, 10:49 PM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - d b - 05-12-2015, 12:35 AM
RE: A case against the x<>y key - Les Bell - 05-12-2015, 01:41 AM



User(s) browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)