I'm still heavily hampered and embarassed by my inability to process much mathematical notation easily in compsci papers :\
we all are
That's why the lesson of the SICP about how the functions commonly used in calculus can be expressed as scheme idioms is so important
@catonano There's also a really good preface in SICM (Structure and Interpretation of Classical Mechanics) where they tear apart how bad much of mathematical notation is. I also had a conversation with Sussman in person where I admitted how bad I am at reading math notation and he said "everyone has a hard time, because mathematical notation is a natural language"
A natural language! I never thought of it that way.
@cwebber What! You're surprised it's a natural language?
Man, this explains why computer people always think of mathematics this way. I am always a little frustrated trying to explain mathematics to them.
@JordiGH Yeah, I don't know a lot of things or think of a lot of things!
I know you meant well but please don't do the "What??? You don't know X?" thing! It's not very helpful... https://jvns.ca/blog/2017/04/27/no-feigning-surprise/
@cwebber I'm more surprised at myself that I have no idea how people think of mathematics.
@cwebber Maybe mathematics shouldn't be a natural language, but damn, it's so annoying to write as if you were writing it for a compiler.
@JordiGH SICM has both some interesting stuff to say about this: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/gjs/6946/sicm-html/book-Z-H-4.html#%_chap_Temp_2
AND a suggested notation that conveniently translates to Scheme: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/gjs/6946/sicm-html/book-Z-H-78.html#%_chap_8
@cwebber Eek, it's based on the worst Spivak book!
@JordiGH the only thing I know about spivak is pronouns
@cwebber Yeah, same guy. He invented the pronouns for the preface of Joy of TeX, but I can't remember if he ever uses them in the body of the book! I looked for them and couldn't find them.
Anyway, he's a well known expositor of geometry and physics, and his (plain) Calculus is widely loved. You should read it! You should be able to understand it.
His Calculus On Manifolds he wrote when he was too young. It was his first book, and it's too raw and doesn't have the polish of later works.
@cwebber Actually, reading Spivak's Calculus should give you a very good idea of how mathematicians write when they aim to be clear!
@JordiGH Thanks for the endorsement! I've added it to my reading list :)