On: The Future of Markdown

[lmm]

I have yet to encounter a spec that was not in some way ambiguous.

[jjr → lmm]

1 + 1 = 2 Is fairly unambiguous until you introduce operator overloading (and why i despise overloading).

[_pferreir_ → jjr]

> 1 + 1 = 2 Is fairly unambiguous until you introduce operator overloading (and why i despise overloading).

It is only unambiguous if you specify the numbering system you are using ;)

</pedantic>

[cynicalkane → _pferreir_]

Is there actually a notation and + operator for which 1 + 1 = 2 is ambiguous? Only being semi-rhetorical, I'd be interested to know if there is one. (Modular arithmetic is not considered ambiguous, at least not in the math neck of the woods.)

[josch → cynicalkane]

Not really answering your question, but more to the point of the discussion in my opinion, a() + b() could be ambiguous if a() and b() are functions with side effects and the evaluation order of the +-operator is not specified.

[ramses0 → cynicalkane]

1 + 1 = 10b is what he's saying.

[_pferreir_ → ramses0]

Yes, that's what I meant - even "1 + 1 = 2" can be ambiguous if no context is provided.

[JadeNB → jjr]

> 1 + 1 = 2 Is fairly unambiguous until you introduce operator overloading (and why i despise overloading).

What is it specifying—or, perhaps a better question, what would an implementation look like? It might be more precise to say "I have yet to encounter an implemented spec that was not in some way ambiguous."

[richbradshaw → jjr]

1 + 1 != 2 if the 1s are magnitudes of vectors - if the directions are opposite, then they can be 0. In fact, 0 <= 1 + 1 <= 2 in that system.

[Dylan16807 → richbradshaw]

That's not how addition works. You're either adding the vectors or you're adding the magnitudes. You don't get to sleight of hand by writing one and adding the other.

[nollidge → jjr]

Overloading is a feature of natural language though, and therefore completely unavoidable in writing a spec.