Talk:Quaternion type: Difference between revisions
→Why is it so complicated?
(new section: why so complicated?) |
|||
Line 99:
--[[User:Grondilu|Grondilu]] ([[User talk:Grondilu|talk]]) 10:27, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
: One issue, here, is that humans are many orders of magnitude smarter than computers. So the information needed to convey a new system to a human is qualitatively different from the engineering needed to convey that system to a computer.
: Another issue is that traditionally programming languages have been thought of as abstractions representing sequences of computer instructions (type theory, for example), or abstractions representing "core mechanisms" (scoping rules, for example). There has been some work based on modeling hardware behavior using mathematical concepts (array theory, for example), but that's not where most communities focus their energy.
: There are lots of infinities here and unless we are careful the computing platform will get bogged down, spending a bulk of the computational time on unnecessary issues. As an example, consider whether we should have a hermetian basis for quaternions or whether octonions are acceptable as an implementation of quaternions. Since we are people, and since we are smart, we have a concept of simplicity which kicks in when we understand something, but computers do not have that. [But this also means that if it seems complicated we do not understand it.] --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 17:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
| |||