In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kirk Sluder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Paul Rubin <http://[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > n! = (n/e)**n * sqrt(2*pi*n) * (1 + (1/12n)) * ... > > If computer languages were to mimic natural languages on this point, > they would support both forms of expression and be sensitive to mode > and mood. And ok, bringing this around to lisp, many complex expressions such as polynomials can be viewed as lists of sub-expressions. So in this case, the expression can be re-written as: (* (subexp1) (subexp2) (subexp3) (subexp4)) Which is probably how I'd solve the expression if I was using paper and pencil: simplify and combine. And there is something that is missing here in arguing about computer language notations in relationship to human language readability, or correspondence to spoken language. I'm not writing code for another human, I'm writing code for a machine. Often, the optimum expression of an mathematical concept for a machine is relatively baroque compared to the optimum expression for a human being. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
