51

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Evgeny. Panasyuk, you wrote: EP> Excites including. EP> Alexander Stepanov once made comments on this thesis (attempt to dissolve mathematics and computre science on the basis of interest to cost of operations) - 1:04:22 AM - https://youtu.be/Ih9gpJga4Vc? t=3862 I just above this thesis also resulted (from this lecture), only in the opposite direction.

52

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Sharov, you wrote: EP>> Excites including. EP>> Alexander Stepanov once made comments on this thesis (attempt to dissolve mathematics and computre science on the basis of interest to cost of operations) - 1:04:22 AM - https://youtu.be/Ih9gpJga4Vc? t=3862 S> I just above this thesis also resulted (from this lecture), only in the opposite direction. Yes, there the same citation is used. Only I referred to the moment hardly earlier - there in reply to the thesis about that that in difference from CS the mathematics does not have concept of the price of operations, Stepans cited as an example the Ancient Greek mathematics where counted a necessary amount of operations with a compasses and a ruler.

53

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Evgeny. Panasyuk, you wrote: EP> For some reason permanently there are attempts to tear off pieces, and even the whole areas of programming from mathematics. The vivid example is announcements about  the functional programming and not  imperative, based only on that that some code on  is close to any known for it from school of the mathematical notation. Though both , and  are is exceptional strict systems with is rigid-logical rules - and consequently including are mathematics. I never , but the code on  (especially pure, type ) really remind a floor-mat. The proof. Not the notation, and the proof scheme. I.e. the code . Itself(himself) the proof of a certain problem-theorem, therefore it so pleased to mathematicians. From mathematicians for mathematicians. During too time the code line on imperative language can launch the rocket on , i.e. are present side-effect'y. On the other hand, all calculations (program) for the sake of these side-effect'ov also are written. Therefore  already which ten years without special success storms minds of programmers.

54

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Evgeny. Panasyuk, you wrote: EP> data structures - too mathematics... We Take for an example database designing. We take the functional requirements and it is transformed them into a dial-up of entities and communications. There is there a mathematics? Somewhere there in depth, of course, yes, but it is is specific at the moment of designing of basis we it we are not soared at all. We are soared by, whether correctly we understood data domain. And it any more mathematics, and accounts department, office-work and other "lyrics". Also we are still soared by that to us the potential user forgot to tell. It too not the mathematics, and is faster psychology. We imagine crowd mentally not outstanding users and we try to estimate, as the system of moves, if instead of a normal use-case in their heads  in the image  any perversion. It too not the mathematics, and is faster social psychology. Especially that its section in which the broken windows are studied. Yes, the database structure is a technical application of predicate calculus, which unambiguously mathematics. But at designing of structure we at all are not engaged in this mathematics. We are engaged in everything, but only not mathematics.

55

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Voblin, you wrote: EP>> data structures - too mathematics... V> we Take for an example database designing. We take the functional requirements and it is transformed them into a dial-up of entities and communications. There is there a mathematics? Somewhere there in depth, of course, yes, but it is is specific at the moment of designing of basis we it we are not soared at all. We are soared by, whether correctly we understood data domain. And it any more mathematics, and accounts department, office-work and other "lyrics". Also we are still soared by that to us the potential user forgot to tell. It too not the mathematics, and is faster psychology. We imagine crowd mentally not outstanding users and we try to estimate, as the system of moves, if instead of a normal use-case in their heads  in the image  any perversion. It too not the mathematics, and is faster social psychology. Especially that its section in which the broken windows are studied. V> Yes, the database structure is a technical application of predicate calculus, which unambiguously mathematics. But at designing of structure we at all are not engaged in this mathematics. We are engaged in everything, but only not mathematics. Are engaged, including mathematics. If to be able to think only of users - that is banal it turns out nothing - besides it it is necessary also to understand as it is all mechanically works, what mechanical glue all it communicates, to be able to apply and change all this abstract mechanics. That who thinks ONLY of users and "other office-work" is a customer, instead of the engineer or the designer. Even if not to know mathematical terms, and to name and use all these small screws and  somehow in own way, intuitively - that it all the same the mathematician - rigid, abstract, mechanical system. Addition does not cease to be addition from that that adding does not know this word.

56

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Evgeny. Panasyuk, you wrote: EP> Are engaged, including mathematics. All question in what share of this most "including". By experience I will tell that the scanty. And this mathematics let not , but it is exact not  level. Including it is necessary not to forget to eat yet. So now, we will absolutize food intake?

57

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Voblin, you wrote: EP>> Are engaged, including mathematics. V> All question in what share of this most "including". By experience I will tell that the scanty. It is faster from ignorance of appropriate terms. Whether here for example many are known that such by Hoare logic, Hoarovsky triples, variants of cycles? Nevertheless at imperative programming it is all arises (and even intuitively it is applied) almost permanently. V> and this mathematics let not , but it is exact not  level. And I did not speak that it is any deep, difficult or super-abstract mathematics. Normally really all is very simple and is is specific.

58

Re: Mathematics vs computer science

Hello, Evgeny. Panasyuk, you wrote: EP> It is faster from ignorance of appropriate terms. With knowledge of appropriate terms a whisker in the full order. But that personally for me their scanty application only is more evident.