Portosian

@Portosian@sh.itjust.works

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Portosian,

Is a Romano as unpleasant as it looks? I’m having a hard time understanding the appeal.

Portosian,

My argument is specifically that using no separation shows intent for which way to interpret and should not default to weak juxtaposition.

Choosing not to use (6/2)(1+2) implies to me to use the only other interpretation.

There’s also the difference between 6/2(1+2) and 6/2*(1+2). I think the post has a point for the latter, but not the former.

Portosian,

None of this has a point. We’re talking over a shitpost rant about common use of math symbols. Even the conclusion boils down to it being a context dependent matter of preference. I’m just disagreeing that the original question as posed should be interpreted with weak juxtaposition.

Portosian,

Honestly, I do disagree that the question is ambiguous. The lack of parenthetical separation is itself a choice that informs order of operations. If the answer was meant to be 9, then the 6/2 would be isolated in parenthesis.

Portosian,

Well RIP your sanity and free time. You’re going to wake up a few weeks from now after having nightmares about unsaturated belts.

Portosian,

Lol, this is also wrong. Replace ape with primate and you’ve got something more accurate. If you actually care about maintaining phyletic groups then apes ( and thus humans) are old world monkeys.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • localhost
  • All magazines
    •
    Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #