Live data from Hacker News

Recursive Functions of Symbolic Expressions Computation by Machine (1960)

www-formal.stanford.edu

11–15 of 15 posts

Re: Recursive Functions of Symbolic Expressions Computation by Machine (1960)

#11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The notation used is almost all explicitly defined or can be trivially derived by reading the descriptions provided, aside from cardinality e.g. |x^2 - a| which is assumed to be common knowledge. Everything else is very simple pseudocode albeit with use of a few Greek letters or symbols, so I could hardly call this inaccessible to somebody who has been programming for 30 years...

So, you're arguing that this: https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/img242.png and this https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/img66.png are accessible with common knowledge to someone with programming experience but without a background in mathematics?

The first one isn't really math-heavy, but it is symbol heavy (and there seem to have been some typos in the LaTeX or errors in generation, some subscripts are borked). The actual translation of the first image to Python-esque code is:

  def r(some_params):
    if predicate_11(some_params): return s(f1(some_params))
    else: return s(f2(some_params))
  def s(some_params):
    if predicate_21(some_params): return r(some_params)
    else: return t(f3(some_params))
  def t(some_params):
    if predicate_31(some_params): return f4(some_params)
    elseif predicate_23(some_params): return r(some_params)
    else: return t(f3(some_params))
I've replaced pi with `predicate` and xi with `some_params`.

The second one, structurally, can also be understood without knowing math but what's actually executed does require some familiarity with math. It's, like above, using a conditional expression described earlier and the lambda notation for defining anonymous functions (to be clear, he also uses it as an example of something that's not quite valid since the name `sqrt` will not be bound inside the lambda, but we can approximate it, invalid multi-line Python lambda incoming):

  sqrt = lambda a, x, epsilon: if abs(x*x - a) 
The previous line of code in that section (no lambda) is equivalent to a Python def:

  def sqrt(a,x,epsilon):
    if abs(x*x-a) 
(NB: All the extra `return`s have to be added because Python is not an expression-oriented language. The language McCarthy is describing is so each expression produces a new value without the need for explicit returns.)

Both of those are there to motivate the introduction of the label form at the bottom of that section.

Re: Recursive Functions of Symbolic Expressions Computation by Machine (1960)

#13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The notation used is almost all explicitly defined or can be trivially derived by reading the descriptions provided, aside from cardinality e.g. |x^2 - a| which is assumed to be common knowledge. Everything else is very simple pseudocode albeit with use of a few Greek letters or symbols, so I could hardly call this inaccessible to somebody who has been programming for 30 years...

So, you're arguing that this: https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/img242.png and this https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/img66.png are accessible with common knowledge to someone with programming experience but without a background in mathematics?

Yes, you need to not run away as soon as a non-alphanumeric symbol is used. That's hardly even mathematical notation.

Re: Recursive Functions of Symbolic Expressions Computation by Machine (1960)

#14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you're arguing that this: https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/img242.png and this https://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/recursive/img66.png are accessible with common knowledge to someone with programming experience but without a background in mathematics?

Yes, you need to not run away as soon as a non-alphanumeric symbol is used. That's hardly even mathematical notation.

It’s 100% mathematical notation

Re: Recursive Functions of Symbolic Expressions Computation by Machine (1960)

#15

I wish my formal math was stronger. I've been programming for 30 years but once a paper I'm reading starts using math notation I can't parse 90% of it and I'm lost.

Just build a rosetta stone; e.g.

  (x 
Wow, so much less cryptic!

Hope this helps.

Post reply on HN