Thanks for the link, Glauco.

I followed this video up to 2:00:00, and had an editor open to scribble 
down some notes while I was watching.  Here are the results.  Please note, 
these are impressions made on the fly, and perhaps not well thought over.

1. Metamath hype: Why on earth is someone like George Hotz interested in 
Metamath at all? There seems to be a hype around, judging from his first 
words.
2. Cryptic labels: He is ranting while faced with theorem names on the HTML 
page of sqr2irr.  No clue whatsoever what they mean.  Compares this to more 
explicit names found in competing products, and in program code in 
general.  I think there is indeed headroom for improvement here. Maybe a 
pop up showing an explanation while hovering over a name alleviates the 
situation.
3. No directories, just a global scope.  Yes, this is a drawback in my 
eyes, too.  But this is not an easy task as it seems at first sight.  If 
you take this idea seriously, i.e. topics are finally independent, you end 
up with a need for a linker infrastructure.  Compare to compiler.
4. Not conforming to standards.  At various occasions he struggles with 
details just because they do not meet his expectations. Syntax for example
5. He somehow got lost in the gory technical details of strict proof syntax 
and verification.  But the core idea of a Metamath proof is applying 
patterns to symbol strings.  He seems not always be aware of this 'road 
map'.  I remember when I first looked into Metamath I was not in the least 
interested in details like how variables are defined.  In fact, I was not 
concerned with program details at all.  I was satisfied to know how to 
replay a proof by hand.  Once I learned the top level formalism, I easily 
could imagine a stack like structure for some automatic verification.
6 Human interface of the Metamath program.  Tries out common commands at 
random, does not use the help feature.  No GUI.
7. He feels at ease when he detects the formal syntax description of the 
Metamath language,and elaborates on implementing it in a Python parser.  
Here he is on firm grounds and starts exploring Metamath.  Unfortunately, 
this distracts him from the core idea, in my eyes, see 5.

Wolf Lammen


Am Sonntag, 22. Dezember 2019 02:13:50 UTC+1 schrieb Glauco:
>
> I was googling for a video about Emetamath, Thierry's plugin, but I found 
> this recent video, that caught my attention:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKi9Q3S1Nsg
>
> The title is "George Hotz | Programming | twitchcoq : pt 3, mostly I want 
> to complain about metamath"
>
> I'm having a late night "dinner", so I've not had time to understand the 
> whole story yet, but it looks like George (a well-known hacker, you can 
> read about his life on Wikipedia) has streamed and recorded a number of 
> multi hours videos (this is the third one) about him programming a parser 
> for Metamath (he read the Metamath book just before the videos).
>
> I've had time to look at the first few minutes, where he complains about 
> set.mm
>
>
> Glauco
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metamath" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/f54685dc-a6f9-4a41-bf41-f5880a67b25b%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to