« first day (1680 days earlier)      last day (3006 days later) » 
01:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

20:17
@pentavalentcarbon Hahaha, I was afraid of that -- it's been months since I've looked at the Input Library, so I had no reckoning for how long it'd been posted.
@Jan My two cents now posted
@Scimonster The particular problem with Excel as an example is that it supports fractional number formatting. To the casual user, more visually familiar with writing fractions with multiple terms in the denominator without parentheses, the programming OOO can be less intuitive. — hBy2Py 24 secs ago
... my convoluted two cents, anyways.
Jan
Jan
Your 2¢ also miss the issue.
There is no worldwide established order of operations with respect to multiplication and division.
Zhe
Zhe
@Jan Wait, what?
Jan
Jan
a*b/c*d is not clearly defined (without brackets).
a*b+c*d is.
And so is a+b-c+d.
Zhe
Zhe
There doesn't appear to be a problem then. I think I'm just missing context to this discussion...
Jan
Jan
Note that a*b*d/c is.
Zhe
Zhe
20:24
Still no problem
Jan
Jan
The problem is Scimonster’s misconception that a/b*c be clearly defined as (a/b)*c. However, that’s not the case.
Zhe
Zhe
A machine would naively interpret it that way
I've see plenty of students input that when they mean a / (b * c)
But again, the ambiguity can't be removed
I don't see a problem with your statements anyway
Jan
Jan
2 hours ago, by Loong
What's wrong with good old-fashions order of operations? Then a/b*c is clearly (a/b)*c. — Scimonster Aug 11 at 13:51
That is the problem.
Assuming a defined order exists.
 
2 hours later…
22:28
Hey guys !!!
Our periodic table is full ! :)
(Well not exactly because physicits discovered atoms made of other nuclei than neutrons and protons but .. )
23:01
@orthocresol
This is so cool for the periodic table !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:D
hmm...
i guess it's nice, haha
01:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (1680 days earlier)      last day (3006 days later) »