@EyalL what if they are not even units, in that there is no delineation to be made?
-
@dibblego this makes no sense to me. maybe you could word this better in more chars?
@EyalL It seems to be quite fundamental to me. The concept X is usable if "not X" is also demonstrable. Is it any other way?
-
-
@dibblego you can divide your solution into such units when non unit things also exist, yes. -
@EyalL Do you agree that to the extent you can achieve this is the extent to which you are functional programming? - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@dibblego for example, a subexpression isn't a unit. Sounds like you're implying its existence means we can't divide solution into units? -
@EyalL Why isn't it also a unit? - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
-
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@dibblego Naming is a concept. It is also dependent on a choice, i.e. arbitrariness. Same for not-naming. How does your rule apply there?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@dibblego It almost seems like you're suggesting that inherency is not only better than choice, but also essential. Yes/no?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.