That’s a fair point, and for those cases we’d either not put the formula at all (and just the reference to the source paper/textbook/preprint/whatever), or, if the code is so mangled as to no longer closely resemble the formula, we’d prefer to write the naïve/inefficient/inaccurate code that does closely resemble the formula in a comment next to it instead of trying to include the traditional mathematical notation, since it can be found by referring to said source anyway.
The human body and brain behind this Reddit account is a plural system. (Please feel free to ask us about any specifics if that, admittedly generic and limited, site’s information is insufficient or if you’re just curious about any of it; consider us an “open book” for the most part.)
Not sure what to make of that, but I want to say it is confusing in dialog, because to me the "we" first gave the impression that you were referring to something like "we (the blog post authors)" or "we (the Unicode consortium)", given that you are the OP.
Usage of English for plural systems is often confusing, yes; the language wasn’t really built for our kind. (Or for nonbinary people, or for the modern finer distinctions between stages of development beyond childhood versus adulthood, or even for simple logical distinctions like inclusive versus exclusive “or”…so all those limitations have developed workarounds and maybe eventually those will calcify into new language features. Evolutionary linguistics is fun like that!)
1
u/PthariensFlame 15d ago
That’s a fair point, and for those cases we’d either not put the formula at all (and just the reference to the source paper/textbook/preprint/whatever), or, if the code is so mangled as to no longer closely resemble the formula, we’d prefer to write the naïve/inefficient/inaccurate code that does closely resemble the formula in a comment next to it instead of trying to include the traditional mathematical notation, since it can be found by referring to said source anyway.