Skip to content

Comment on Ask HN: Why is math so obsessed with ancient syntax and frameworks?

Comments

there is a more general problem here. why does <insert specialty> insist on using domain specific language when ordinary words do fine?

derivative or gradient = slope

is a classic example. mention the word calculus and someone panics in a fit of imagined complexity. describe it in english, clearly, and its very easy...

however the classic counterargument is that it is easier to invent words with context specific meanings for clarity. this makes more sense if you try and describe a functional integral for instance... you need the concept of a function, and an integral which themselves rely on other concepts etc. and would require several sentences to explain well...

also, you have made a faulty assumption about programming - new syntax and language is invented, but the old syntax and language is not replaced - we are stuck with the old stuff too. there are still plenty of areas where C is the only choice - nobody has yet come up with an alternative which addresses the same problems - so 30 years on we still use C - and its use pollutes all of the terminology associated with programming.

(tangent: i still don't understand why we can't compile e.g. Python, C#, Ruby, JavaScript etc. to native code with the benefits of C [Haskell does this quite well for instance - but is held back by general quality of compiler vs. C compilers having billions of dollars and thousands of man years poured into them] - VM or JIT should be a choice if you like spunking away performance - it would be nice if C would die... as much as I enjoy it - GCC, LLVM etc. make the same code gen available for any language with a little work - this feels to me an infinitely better solution than any VM or JIT can hope to be...)

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.