Is there a version of math with better names for things? Imagine if we had "Naur loop" and "Hoare loop" instead of "for loop" and "while loop." Yet we have Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, Kullback–Leibler divergence, Euler's formula, ...
-
Show this thread
-
Picking good names is a crucial tool for thought. A good name communicates or reminds you of the idea underneath an abstraction. Naming something after a person is the 2nd laziest form of naming. First is "Type 1" and "Type 2" error, the dumbest naming scheme ever invented.
4 replies 6 retweets 62 likesShow this thread -
Extended thoughts. Naming conventions that need to die: http://willcrichton.net/notes/naming-conventions-that-need-to-die/ …
3 replies 11 retweets 30 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @wcrichton @SimonSapin
The statement about Beginning Student isn't correct -- we call them first and rest in the teaching material and everywhere else. The language provides car and cdr for people who want to teach that way, but it's strongly discouraged.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Thanks for the clarification. I've added this to the post accordingly.
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.
cognitive psychology. PhD