You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

loup-vaillant comments on More intuitive programming languages - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: A4FB53AC 15 April 2012 11:35AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (89)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: loup-vaillant 16 April 2012 10:01:24AM *  3 points [-]

Another prerequisite is algebra: if one does not understand that substituting "X" in "X²" by "A+1" makes "(A+1)²", how are they supposed to substitute parts of program with function calls?

This alone is enough to get my upvote. I often struggle to explain that programming is a form of math (or at least, that it needs math). One typical answer goes like

When you are designing algorithms, sure, but these days we're mostly plugging libraries together.

My suffocation and stuttering (refusing to change one's mind in the face of compelling sounding arguments tends to do that) squash any attempt at a proper rebuttal. But now, I have one:

Using function calls? I hope for your sake that you get that pesky mathematical concept of "substitution".