Anonymous user
Talk:Set of real numbers: Difference between revisions
→Extra Credit?: high school math = simple is bad assumption?
(→Extra Credit?: How much easier it could be) |
(→Extra Credit?: high school math = simple is bad assumption?) |
||
Line 38:
::::The maths in the optional part is largely nothing to do with the subject of the main task, forcing the little that ''is'', to be obscured. Some competancy in programming in a language can be taken for granted in the audience, but that does not necessarily translate to a ready grasp of this branch of mathematics. You state that the answer to your equation is simple, it is not germane however, and not everyone thinks it is simple.
::::--[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 05:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
::::: "Computer representation of real numbers as a set" is so much more complicated than "solving sin(x) = +/- 1/2 over real domain" that, if you don't have "a ready grasp of this branch of mathematics" (what branch, really?) you probably don't want to deal with this task. For the optional goal, I want an easy and unambiguous specification of a somewhat large number of disjoint regions of real numbers, that 1) is easy to program for but not easy, at least not pleasant, to write down completely by hand; 2) is not periodic, so you need a general approach instead of just calculate the first few numbers and multiply the result by 10; 3) whose intermediate results are easy to check, say, against a plotted curve; 4) does not require more than high school math. Also the required part of the task already asked for combinations of 2 simple sets, it's highly redundant to ask for 5. I don't think the above requirements are so very extraordinarily steep for a program that's supposed to deal with real numbers, and frankly I'm surprised that complaints so far have been about sin(x) = 1/2 instead of more crucial stuff like floating point precision, representibility of real sets on a computer, ambiguity of infinities, etc. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 06:16, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
| |||