
In reference to your post in emergence why is theorem-proving important?
Moderators: kiore, The_Metatron, Blip
One of things I am trying to say in that thread is that if importance is measured in numbers of bent-spoons, I'm failing to measure up. Programming wants to be engineering, but like religion and philosophy, it ends up being a popularity contest.SpeedOfSound wrote:Buffer overflow a crime?It's a fucking artform! Like stack redirection and overlaying. Damn. Kids today...
In reference to your post in emergence why is theorem-proving important?
VazScep wrote:One of things I am trying to say in that thread is that if importance is measured in numbers of bent-spoons, I'm failing to measure up. Programming wants to be engineering, but like religion and philosophy, it ends up being a popularity contest.SpeedOfSound wrote:Buffer overflow a crime?It's a fucking artform! Like stack redirection and overlaying. Damn. Kids today...
In reference to your post in emergence why is theorem-proving important?
How do you feel about strong typing? If you're a fan, there's some seriously fucking cool stuff I can talk about, and it ties in beautifully with theorem proving. Otherwise, you'll find it kind of stupid.
You have no constraints when you're in front of a Turing machine.SpeedOfSound wrote:I am completely torn between two poles on strong typing. As long as you can over-ride everything the I am a fan.
Take implication in logic. I gave two axioms governing the logic of implication earlier on in the thread. Here's the first:I would like to dig into some of these new languages but not sure if I have the time. Tell me a about a pretty thing or two. I've got my head inside medium densely spiny neurons right now so I will probably disappoint you.
> :t const
const :: a -> b -> a
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest