bruno

"mr storylets"

writer (derogatory). lead designer on Fallen London.

http://twitter.com/notbrunoagain


THESE POSTS ARE PROVIDED “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE POSTS OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE POSTS.


Bluesky
brunodias.bsky.social

It is widely acknowledged among programmers that the more your code looks like math, the more correct it is. This has led to important advances such as Haskell programmers' use of single-character variable names or the Julia convention where 2x is syntactic sugar to write 2 * x. I propose, however, that we are missing one particular bit of necessary correctness. I believe that it is crucial for ECMA to implement a new syntax for dividing in JavaScript, namely:

                                     L
const f = (x, b, k, L) => ---------------------------
                           1+Math.exp(-k * (x - b)

You must log in to comment.

in reply to @bruno's post: