A much better split than Yegge's.
What was Yegge's split?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4365255
I agree with MaysonL.
51–60 of 106 posts
A much better split than Yegge's.
What was Yegge's split?
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4365255
I agree with MaysonL.
Not the tastiest, but it's quick and it gets the job done.
And yes, I'm a PHP programmer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Statistics?
A large portion of my math courses in school were Statistics courses (as they were requirements). Spending 4 weeks learning how to use R every single class got old quick. The actual meat of the topics could have been more interesting with a proper approach. My favorite topics that I have messed with so far are probably Number Theory and Logic. Pointers to resources or book recommendations welcome.
I prefer to eat my corn-on-the-cob quickly, with lots of butter and salt, whilst making as much mess as I can. It's one of the few meals where its' socially acceptable to eat like a pig :)
BASIC programmer?
I'm not had formal training in Mathematics beyond High School, though I've worked my way though introductory texts to Calculus (single variable), Linear Algebra and Discrete Mathematics (thanks in a large part to reading Yegge's rants and being inspired to learn by the exceptionally smart people on HN - really, I now wish I'd pursued Mathematics further, was in the top 5% at high school but didn't enjoy it).
I eat my corn in rings, fix a z and then scrape through theta before choosing the next z. It's efficient and it sort-of follows the cornkernel grid. I'm also more of a statistician who edits in vi and emacs every day and I'm challenging myself with some category theory and abstract algebra because I find it intoxicating. So, I don't have a clue how to fit into this divide.
Analyst connect things by putting them in a "big" circle and then making the circle arbitrarily small.
Algebraist connect things by showing that you can get from one to the other with a line of operations.
I don't remember how I eat corn on the cob but I rarely finish it in either case :(
I'm very confused by the idea that OOP would be considered somehow more "algebraic". Functional programming seems way more algebraic to me. I mean, writing Haskell seems about as algebraic as programming gets even without using monads or other such very-high-level abstractions. Also, odd where he puts emacs/vi compared to where he puts programming languages, considering that emacs uses Lisp. (FWIW, I prefer algebra,…