Talk:Bernstein basis polynomials: Difference between revisions
→Get rid of "Subprogram(1)".."Subprogram(5)"
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 32:
:: You appear to have invented a criticism there I did not make. --[[User:Petelomax|Petelomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 01:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. We seem to belong to entirely different schools of programming. --[[User:Chemoelectric|Chemoelectric]] ([[User talk:Chemoelectric|talk]]) 10:59, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
::No worries, I made my case, it didn't stick, I'll not dwell on it. --[[User:Petelomax|Petelomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 08:07, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
I should like to make a comment on which I use the term "subprogram" when giving numbers to parts of the code to be written. It is simply that I can think of no programming language that uses that term in its syntax. We have "subroutine", "procedure", "function", "predicate", ... even "word" (that goes in a "dictionary"). But not "subprogram". "Subroutine" and "procedure" would be appropriate terms, but Fortran made it seem a "function" is not also a "subroutine", when the difference is merely syntactic. And what is a "function" and what a "procedure"? What Common Lisp calls a "function", Scheme calls a "procedure". Some other languages distinguish "function" from "procedure", while others call a "function" a "procedure". But "subprogram", although a dated term, does not have these problems.
::<small>(Just to be crystal clear, it is much more the "(1)" than "subprogram" I objected to --[[User:Petelomax|Petelomax]] ([[User talk:Petelomax|talk]]) 08:07, 29 May 2023 (UTC))</small>
As for what name one actually uses for a subprogram, does this not depend more on the traditions of a particular language than it does on the task at hand? One calls a predicate "whateverp" or "whatever-p" in Common Lisp, but "whatever?" in Scheme, even though both languages allow punctuation symbols in names. In other languages one writes "is_whatever", and in others "isWhatever" or "IsWhatever". In traditional Fortran (the language of LAPACK), one completely avoids names over six characters long, so it might be "WTEVER". (This is why LAPACK subroutine names are the way they are.) In my own examples here, I used entirely unlike names in different languages. (I have added ATS, Object Icon, and m4 since the initial two, which already had entirely different names for the parts.) We all have opinions on these things. I for one, dislike camel-case, and am annoyed if I can't use "| y = p(x)² |" as a variable name, as one can in Common Lisp or Scheme. --[[User:Chemoelectric|Chemoelectric]] ([[User talk:Chemoelectric|talk]]) 11:23, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
| |||