Talk:Proof: Difference between revisions
→Clarification needed: type theory and calculus orthogonal.
(→Clarification needed: rubbing it in) |
(→Clarification needed: type theory and calculus orthogonal.) |
||
Line 20:
::Hmmm... I slept through most of my calculus classes, due to having '''THE MOST BORING TEACHER IN THE UNIVERSE''' (really) and as a result, most math above simple algebra I just don't get. I think I'll give this task a pass. -- [[User:Eriksiers|Eriksiers]] 15:05, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
::: But this is not much more than elemental type theory. Hardly as complex as the infinitesimal calculus... –[[User:Dkf|Donal Fellows]] 16:38, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
:::: I passed Calc 2, and it ''still'' took me a couple years and lurking in discussions of C++0x before I really started understanding what was being talked about in this task. Type theory and calculus seem to me to be orthogonal subjects. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 19:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
| |||