You had different teachers than I had. I remember being taught the definition of function in grade school, again in high school, and again in college. The definitions weren't the same but they tied together.
A key concept has been that a function has a single value for any single argument. y equals one minus x squared is a function (graph of a parabola). y squared equals one minus x squared (graph of a circle) is not a function. That term got borrowed for programming (naming things is hard), but functions in programming languages have only a loose relationship to the earlier concepts. -- Raul On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:50 PM, Don Guinn <[email protected]> wrote: > When in grade school they called things like + and - "operators". But they > never defined it. Then in trig thay had "functions", but they never defined > what functions were either. Then came calculus. Differentiating and > integrating were never given a group name or general classification. I > think teachers thought they were functions. But obviously quite different > from things like sin and cos. I searched several math school books looking > for definitions. Never found any. They just started using the terms without > definition. > > I asked several people the difference between function and operator and got > nonsense answers. So for the fun of it, I googled it. Overwhelmed. The only > definitions that make sense are those of calling things as J did like +, -, > sin and cos "verbs" and differentials and integration "modifiers". Because > differentials and integrals return "functions". Or in J terminology, > "verbs". > > These things are concepts. I think I have an understanding of the concepts, > but as to what to call them. Who knows? The thing is that we need to try > many ways to describe them until one of them sticks. Maybe one of the > descriptions will work with students or other people. But I suspect that > few people realize that things like differentiation is really different > from + and sin. > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:09 PM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Too right, Devon. >> >> And have you explored the unicode situation with minus? Not to mention pi >> and mu. >> >> If programmers coded like they talk and write, planes would be dropping on >> our heads from all over the sky. >> >> I knew folk who'd never read a manual or an article about a novel language. >> And they didn't read comments in code. >> Only the code – and then they'd try out variants, to see what worked and >> what didn't. >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Devon McCormick <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > I did once ask a fellow, knowledgable programmer if the distinction >> between >> > function and operator in conventional languages in fact meant "with which >> > alphabet do you spell it?" >> > If it's a plain old ASCII name, like "plus", it's a function; a symbol >> like >> > "+" is an operator, even if both tokens behave exactly the same. >> > Ultimately not a particularly illuminating distinction. >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > > > it does not match my understanding of how standards bodies work >> > > >> > > However they work, they don't seem to produce a leading answer to a >> > leading >> > > question. >> > > >> > > Before posting my appeal, I googled variants of "ISO computer >> > terminology". >> > > I got the impression there were over 30 ISO committees dealing with >> > aspects >> > > of this topic, including the vexed one of translating computer >> manuals. I >> > > gave up and asked this forum if anyone could recommend the leading >> (ISO) >> > > source of common terms, like: platform, program, etc. (…hey! – I've >> just >> > > reduxed my original post.) >> > > >> > > It seems nobody can. I might as well have asked the Freemasons their >> > > meaning of "secret society". >> > > >> > > > that does not match my understanding of how language use works >> > > >> > > What hope is there of dialog with someone if you don't agree on basic >> > > terms? >> > > That's my understanding of how language use works. Or doesn't. >> > > >> > > Yet here I am, setting out (…yet again) to talk to non-J initiates >> about >> > J >> > > – and I want to use words which I know they'll understand, like: >> > variable, >> > > constant, function – and I want to avoid words like noun, verb, >> pronoun, >> > > proverb – because that's all J mystery jargon. >> > > >> > > Don't I need a touchstone of definitions my reader and I will agree on? >> > > >> > > To-date I've come up with these candidates: >> > > (a) The Oxford Dictionary (…nowadays better than I expected it to be, >> > > going by past experience) >> > > (b) The following site: http://techterms.com >> > > …which is cool. Just what I was looking for. But lacks the authority of >> > an >> > > ISO standard. >> > > >> > > Also (…oh no!) I look up a word like: Constant –and I don't agree with >> > what >> > > it says… >> > > https://techterms.com/definition/constant >> > > In the final para it seems to be describing #define, not: const (…if >> you >> > > know any C/C++). >> > > Plus no mention of IMHO the chief role of a "constant": to behave >> > > programatically like a variable but preclude reassignment. >> > > Thus scotching the perennial C/C++ bug: >> > > if (myconst = x) { … } >> > > >> > > Also, on the home page, "Today's Quiz Question" is garbled… not a good >> > sign >> > > for something purporting to be authoritative. >> > > >> > > Can anyone do better? >> > > >> > > …there, now I've described exactly what I'm looking for. >> > > >> > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Raul Miller <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > I do not think that "common usage" depends on ISO standards. >> > > > >> > > > Or, at least, that does not match my understanding of how language >> use >> > > > works (and, for that matter, it does not match my understanding of >> how >> > > > standards bodies work). >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Raul >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > Sorry, Joe, I want "common programmer terms" for "platform, >> program, >> > > > etc", >> > > > > i.e. terms common to all programmers, not just J-ers. >> > > > > >> > > > > Especially not J-ers! >> > > > > >> > > > > I tried looking up some of these terms in the Oxford Dictionary of >> > > > English >> > > > > (courtesy Apple) and I'm impressed. It seems it has authoritative >> but >> > > > > straightforward meanings under the subheading "Computing" for all >> > I've >> > > > tried >> > > > > . >> > > > > >> > > > > But I'm still hoping to hear what ISO standard people on this list >> > use, >> > > > or >> > > > > some standards body. I'm taking the baffled silence to mean that >> > nobody >> > > > has >> > > > > ever used such a list. The fabled precision of IT professionals >> > doesn't >> > > > > extend to terminology, it seems. >> > > > > >> > > > > Such lists exist. I've seen them – though only in German, and that >> > was >> > > > > decades ago. Documenters need them for the purpose of translating >> > > > manuals. >> > > > > Though maybe the whole thing is still woolly, like it was in my >> day. >> > An >> > > > > Arab once told me he always used the English manual because he >> > couldn't >> > > > > make head or tail of the Arabic one. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:57 PM, Joe Bogner <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> I went back and looked at some of the existing material >> > > > >> >> > > > >> This seems to be a good list of definitions with examples: >> > > > >> http://www.jsoftware.com/help/primer/contents.htm >> > > > >> >> > > > >> This text seems devoid of too many terms: >> > > > >> http://www.jsoftware.com/books/pdf/easyj.pdf >> > > > >> >> > > > >> Of course, I'm not reading these with "beginner eyes" so both may >> > > still >> > > > >> need to be unpacked more >> > > > >> >> > > > >> On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 7:28 AM, Ian Clark <[email protected]> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > It's absurdly difficult to write a good "first-contact" text >> for J >> > > > >> without >> > > > >> > reference to a single accepted source of definitions like: >> > platform, >> > > > >> > program, app, script, variable, constant, function, array, >> string, >> > > > >> > character, number … >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Is there an ISO standard for common programmer terms (in >> English)? >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > If the answer is: legion (…my first impression) – then is there >> > one >> > > > that >> > > > >> > stands out for you? >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > I have an operational need for a weblink to a good clear >> published >> > > > free >> > > > >> > authoritative text. To avoid cluttering this thread, please >> don't >> > > > offer >> > > > >> > your own definitions of the above terms here (although of course >> > I'd >> > > > be >> > > > >> > frightfully interested to hear them one day.) >> > > > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > ---------- >> > > > >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/ >> > > > forums.htm >> > > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > ---------- >> > > > >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/ >> > > forums.htm >> > > > >> >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> > ---------- >> > > > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/ >> > forums.htm >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> > > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/ >> forums.htm >> > > > >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > >> > Devon McCormick, CFA >> > >> > Quantitative Consultant >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
