16:54 Those are not Rational numbers, those are fractional numbers. A ratio is different from a fraction. In a ratio you can use decimals, as in the ratio between Milometers and Miles. 1 - 1.61 reads One to One point six one. In this case we are interested in the difference between the two numbers. In the case of fractions we are interested in how many pieces we have broken one into and how many of those pieces we have? like 3/4 or 1/3
@@EvenStarLoveAnanda you're talking about representation, but fractions and rationals collapse when you're working with mathematical rigor so they're also the same thing
'A pitcher, pitches a curve ball to the batter." If we can read code like this, then why can't we write code like this? We need to adapt natural languages for coding, so everyone can write programs for their own computers. This is the future. We need to create Verbal and Visual programming languages. And don't fear for your jobs, coders. Just because everyone can write, that does not mean everyone can be a poet.
Great talk but i can't help but notice that this guy has the Captain Disillusion fit
Great intro to Clojure, thanks!
Thanks for posting these!
at 25:00, it is the same word, no problem, because 'map' as noun is datastructure, and 'map' as verb is function
Thank you!
Thanks for sharing?
16:54 Those are not Rational numbers, those are fractional numbers.
A ratio is different from a fraction.
In a ratio you can use decimals, as in the ratio between Milometers and Miles.
1 - 1.61 reads One to One point six one.
In this case we are interested in the difference between the two numbers.
In the case of fractions we are interested in how many pieces we have broken one into and how many of those pieces we have? like 3/4 or 1/3
A Rational number is the ratio of two integers, a member of Q.
@@andrewlecouteurbisson7217 Correct, that is what I was saying. and a fractional number is different as I was explaining.
@@EvenStarLoveAnanda you're talking about representation, but fractions and rationals collapse when you're working with mathematical rigor so they're also the same thing
'A pitcher, pitches a curve ball to the batter."
If we can read code like this, then why can't we write code like this?
We need to adapt natural languages for coding, so everyone can write programs for their own computers.
This is the future.
We need to create Verbal and Visual programming languages.
And don't fear for your jobs, coders.
Just because everyone can write, that does not mean everyone can be a poet.