2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2-2+2 x 0?

Overview Chat Bike Members News Women

This topic has 482 replies, 114 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by oldnpastit.

Viewing 40 posts - 241 through 280 (of 483 total)

← 1 2 3 … 6 7 8 … 11 12 13 →

2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2-2+2 x 0?
ransos
Free Member

“All that demostrates is that you don’t know how to use your calculator properly. “

I entered it in exactly the same way on excel, and got 26.

I’m perfectly aware of how to get the correct answer on my calculator. But that relies on using a convention, which as I said, isn’t maths.

Posted 12 years ago

ransos
Free Member

.

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

it’s just a convention, not maths. The argument about maths being right or wrong is irrelevant.

y = mx + c

So is that:

y = m (x + c)

or

y = (mx) + c

??

How about:
1 + 3²

So is that 10 or 16?

The convention IS maths.

Posted 12 years ago

Fresh Goods Friday 703 - The Mushroom ASMR Edition

ransos
Free Member

It’s a convention to tell you where the parentheses are. Not maths.

Posted 12 years ago

molgrips
Free Member

Operator precedence is part of maths.

Posted 12 years ago

mogrim
Full Member

GrahamS may be an Apple loving freak, but he’s 100% right on the fact that the convention is maths.

Posted 12 years ago

antigee
Full Member

isn’t maths

pedant point – correct isn’t it arithmetic?

Posted 12 years ago

WackoAK
Free Member

pedant point – correct isn’t it arithmetic?

Arithmetic is a “branch” of mathematics 😉

Posted 12 years ago

verses
Full Member

teamhurtmore – Member

Is this the perfect STW thread?

1. Deviation from MTB
2. Interesting question (albeit it with hidden trap)
3. Evidence that threads can be misinterpreted (the zeros, read this as an oral question, the 26s as a written one)
4. Errors
5. Debate
6. Abuse
7. Defensiveness
8. Bigotry
9. Ya, boo, sucks
10. Finally humour

It fails perfection on one point… It wasn’t mistakenly posted in the Bike Forum…

Posted 12 years ago

funkynick
Full Member

As I said earlier… and in agreement with Graham and the others just above…

Without convention there is no mathematics.

I could work in gribbles and farks but without there being some convention that allows you to interpret what those mean, then it’s pretty much all meaningless.

Oh, and it doesn’t tell you where the parentheses are, they could be added in but are wholly unnecessary as the precedence of the operators already contains that information.

Posted 12 years ago

miketually
Free Member

maths

Or math?

Posted 12 years ago

ebygomm
Free Member

they could be added in but are wholly necessary as the precedence of the operators already contains that information.

Wholly necessary?

Make your mind up 🙂

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

Oh, and it doesn’t tell you where the parentheses are, they could be added in but are wholly [un]necessary as the precedence of the operators already contains that information.

Ed Zackerly.

Also the parentheses are part of the same “convention” anyway, as they are the P in PEMDAS (or the B in BODMAS).

If you understand that you do the bit in brackets first then you are already following the convention.

Or math?

Only if you study mathematic.

Posted 12 years ago

funkynick
Full Member

ebygomm… I have no idea what you could mean…

😉

Posted 12 years ago

16stonepig
Free Member

I only just noticed that the new windows calculator does operator precedence for you. It seems like cheating to me – you should know how to interpret it and enter it accordingly.

Just for fun I tried it in SQL Server as well:

select 2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2+2-2+2*0

———–
26

(1 row(s) affected)

Posted 12 years ago

ChrisHeath
Full Member

Type it as written into Windows calculator will get you 0.

Not on modern Windows (i.e. Windows 7)

XP here. Open calculator. ‘View’ dropdown. Select ‘scientific’. Type it in and out pop the correct answer. Which is 26.

Posted 12 years ago

portlyone
Full Member

Born to a maths teacher, it’s 26 🙂

Posted 12 years ago

aracer
Free Member

I have to admit, speaking as a software engineer, I would ALWAYS put brackets in anything like this. Not because the computer needs them, but because I know my fellow engineers ~~are idiots~~ may not have had their coffee when they read it

For something that complicated maybe, but would you use parentheses for
output = input + offset * offsetScale;
?

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

Yeah I probably would aracer.

output = input + (offset * offsetScale);

In fact our coding standards insist on it and I’d pull someone up in a code review if they didn’t do it.

It shouldn’t be needed, but anything that makes someone stop and think even for a second while reading simple code like that should be eliminated.

Posted 12 years ago

Elfinsafety
Free Member

elf’s quiet…..
Thankfully

Probably off spoiling someone else’s thread, which he didn’t understand either.

Diddums. Someone stole your dinner money too? 😆

Yay! Someone has learned something. AND a pretty girl talked to me. About Maths!
My day is complete.

(Flushes Graham’s head down the bogs. Tips contents of his school satchel (not sports bayg like normal kids, a flipping satchel ffs…) into urinal. Gives Graham a wedgie in front of the girls. Blows smoke in Emsz’ face, knowing this will undoubtedly make her fancy him)

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

*sobs*

I thought we’d agree to be friends after I made you £600?

You’ve totally ruined my favourite jotter cover now.
My mum will be so cross.

Posted 12 years ago

Elfinsafety
Free Member

Jotter?

Jotter???

Gis it ear…

(Grabs it, sets light to it)

Posted 12 years ago

nedrapier
Full Member

ransos – Member
The answer using conventional notation is obviously 26. But as has already been pointed out – it’s just a convention, not maths.

Maths is a collection of coventions. Some of them contradict, some of them don’t. Unless you want to not care about anything with numbers in, you’d better start using the standard set of conventions for standard questions.

My answer’s 32.

Base 8 and BODMAS

Posted 12 years ago

aracer
Free Member

In fact our coding standards insist on it and I’d pull someone up in a code review if they didn’t do it.

Really? Fairly sure I’ve never had a coding standard which insisted on that. To be fair I usually do put in unnecessary braces to make it more explicit, but I doubt I would for that.

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

(Grabs it, sets light to it)

Nooooooo…. Optimuuuuussssss…. Bumblebee…. Shockwave… … whyyyyyyy?

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

Really? Fairly sure I’ve never had a coding standard which insisted on that

Yep – financial, military and medical embedded software – we are pretty strict about anything that can cause confusion.

Posted 12 years ago

toppers3933
Free Member

111111111×111111111=

No calculators.

Posted 12 years ago

wwaswas
Full Member

financial, military and medical embedded software

all at once? that must be confusing?

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

123456..can’t be arsed counting the 1’s….654321

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

all at once? that must be confusing?

Yep. Soldier gets shot and we work out if the budget will cover his medical expenses 😀

Posted 12 years ago

Elfinsafety
Free Member

123456787654321

Or is it binary?

Posted 12 years ago

aracer
Free Member

financial, military and medical embedded software

Hmm – I’ve done stuff like that – maybe I didn’t read the coding standard properly (then again, you’re possibly talking about safety critical software, which wasn’t the case for most of what I did, and changed the game considerably when it was).

Posted 12 years ago

aracer
Free Member

111111111×111111111=

12345678987654321

Posted 12 years ago

emsz
Free Member

Elf,

Loling at the school thing. I would have helped GrahamS.

Posted 12 years ago

Elfinsafety
Free Member

Yeah Aracer’s right (maybe); I missed off a 1 in each line. Thought it was 8 1’s instead of nine. 😳

Bloody tricky to see on the screen tbh.

Calculator gives an error on that sum anyway. Too much for it poor little thing. 🙁

Enough already. Mind-stretching but I’ve got ADHD. Probbly why I never really enjoyed Maffs much.

Posted 12 years ago

Elfinsafety
Free Member

I would have helped GrahamS.

(Feels spurned. Gets angry, Stabs nerdy maffs kid in eye with biro. Is taken out of lessons and made to see Educational Psychologist. Again)

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

you’re possibly talking about safety critical software

Yep. MISRA standards plus some of our own. Generally very strict.

I would have helped GrahamS.

Yaaay! Can you help me wring my satchel out?

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh… my beautiful retina…

Posted 12 years ago

bigyinn
Free Member

Elfinsafety – Member

elf’s quiet…..
Thankfully

Probably off spoiling someone else’s thread, which he didn’t understand either.

Diddums. Someone stole your dinner money too?
No i go home for lunch.

Its just getting a bit tedious you jumping in threads that you’re clearly not interested in, yet feel you need to disrupt the discussion and make smart ass comments in the direction of those who understand whats being said.
Whilst you do make valid points on other threads, you let yourself down on this thread by trying to be clever and take the micky out of others. Its a form of bullying and isn’t wanted or needed here. 🙄

Posted 12 years ago

GrahamS
Full Member

bigyinn for Head Boy 😉

Posted 12 years ago

bigyinn
Free Member

Not likely, they caught me with matches last week 😕

Posted 12 years ago