= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DSimon comments on Kevin T. Kelly's Ockham Efficiency Theorem - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (81)
We could keep the abbreviated syntax but avoid the necessity of parentheses by using post-op notation, couldn't we?
For that, I think we'd need a stack with a line-termination character. In effect, we'd be removing two characters for one, which I suppose would be an improvement.
So:
The order of operations can be variable dependent on the number
The notation method effects pattern
The pattern can change if primes are always used
Etc.
How many ways can we change the rules? How many rules are there?
It is amazing just how much variation in pattern can be achieved just by changing and/or adding/subtracting rules.
There is the general rule of rules:
The fewer the rules, the less variable the pattern, and the inverse, the more rules the more variable the pattern.