- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
- Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Other Series
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
Admin
Admin
There was an SCCA car race that weekend so I took it with me to work on it in the scoring tower between races. That day in the scoring tower, I was sitting next to a high school math teacher who kept looking over my shoulder but never said a word until I did something that really surprised her.
On one problem, I made an error early on and ended up after many pages of work with a horrendus equation that took about half a page to write it down with all possible terms combined. Knowing I would never solve it and there must be something wrong, I wrote down something like "The solution of the above equation is left as an exercise to the reader." She just about had a fit over that.
I had meant to go back and redo that problem, but forgot to do it so it got turned in just like that. Apparently the prof agreed because I made an 'A' on the exam and the course.
Admin
That's fair enough in an upper-level math class. You should already understand "mathematical rigor". My thesis advisor pretty much told us, "Work on each of the problems until you are satisfied. I already know the answer."
Of course, the problem in your case was that your error lead to a wrong (and worse yet, bad) representation of the problem. This makes it harder to thread the correct parts of the argument through. It's still possible, and your prof probably just glazed over during the mistake part, and read the rest of the argument based on the "join principle". (A function is a many-to-one join of types)
This notion of "threading an argument through a construct" is my biggest problem with modern programming practice. Choosing the wrong normal form for computation means having to "thread" an argument through inappropriate constructs. For example, there is absolutely no need to use a factory pattern in a language with functors ("map" functions over arbitrary containers). And you shouldn't even want to. All that boilerplate has to be maintained.
Admin
Really? A good portion of the answers when I took calculus were 0, with a close second being 1; of course, the textbooks would usually give problems which ended with "nice" numbers like that.
Admin
f(x) = 42x what's f'(x)?
Admin
It dosn't, it's the Notification Area.
And it can be used to notify the user that a process has exited, a process exiting deleting the notification that a process exited would be a real WTF.
Admin
Admin
This is not the survey you are looking for
Admin
I think that Windows 7 is the best OS over because of ability of Microsoft programmers to think about such things.
Admin
Oh hey there DirectVobSub. I've had the same thing happen to me after watching a bunch of videos, although not quite as many icons as that.
Admin
TRWTF:
[image](Yes, it's an image. Clicking it will not accomplish anything. Yes, it's really a trackback URL on this article...)
Admin
Look - 42 is the answer - to the big questions - about Life, the Universe, and Everything..? Of course it can't be an answer to a simple calculus problem!
Ol' "...as simple as you wanna be..." Bob
Admin
He'll feel stupid when he's returning his Roku music player for the 653rd time in two years.
Admin
Hopefully that plane has paradox-absorbing bumpers, or they are going to be in trouble.
Admin
hey baby, wanna integral from 10 to 13 of 2xdx?
Admin
Am i the only one who would click "disagree" there?