LOGO-L> RE: prefix/infix discussion 
Author Message
 LOGO-L> RE: prefix/infix discussion


Subject:                LOGO-L> Scope of Logo-L (was Re: general questions)

Quote:
> What do others think? Are these kinds of discussions too esoteric?

I think prefix is easier to work with. It's easier to create a symbolic
"derive" funcion. eg.

        show derive [sum product 2 :x product 3 :x] "x
[sum 2 3]

because you don't need to take care of parenthesis.

What do you think about HP calculators and their use of postfix notation?

I think it is generally agreed that Casio calculators are easier to use
because they use infix notation instead of postfix. But probably that is
because they are use to solve school problems which are presented in infix
notation (so students have to think less :).

Daniel

---------------------------------------------------------------





Thu, 27 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> RE: prefix/infix discussion

Quote:

> I think prefix is easier to work with. It's easier to create a symbolic
> "derive" funcion. eg.

>         show derive [sum product 2 :x product 3 :x] "x
> [sum 2 3]

> because you don't need to take care of parenthesis.

Can I lower the tone of the debate by saying that my pupils can spell
+ - * and /,
the difficulty of spelling *difference* with any degree of consistency is a
challenge. Product and quotient are not words found in the active vocabulary of
a South London {*filter*}ager. Even so it would become a matter of number of
keystrokes.

Can I ask the gurus about one of my big bugbears- caused by pressure from
colleagues that are obliged to teach spelling. They do not appreciate me
telling yougsters that *pencolour* must be spelt *pencolor*. Would it be earth
shattering to write the alternative spellings into MSW and UCB. I am not
thinking of doing a complete makeover, but just to let the turtle accept the
extra *u* should a International English user put it in.

---------------------------------------------------------------





Thu, 27 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> RE: prefix/infix discussion

Quote:
> Can I ask the gurus about one of my big bugbears- caused by pressure from
> colleagues that are obliged to teach spelling. They do not appreciate me
> telling yougsters that *pencolour* must be spelt *pencolor*. Would it be earth
> shattering to write the alternative spellings into MSW and UCB. I am not
> thinking of doing a complete makeover, but just to let the turtle accept the
> extra *u* should a International English user put it in.

Two things:

a) Does this mean that the rest of us "International" users have to ask
gurus for a spelling like "bojapera" ? :-)

b) If *pencolor* really bothers you that much, what keeps you from doing
it yourself -- something like:

copydef "pencolour "pencolor

and stick is somewhere convenient -- like in ucblogo library directory.



Thu, 27 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> RE: prefix/infix discussion

Quote:

> > > Can I ask the gurus about one of my big bugbears- caused by pressure from
> > > colleagues that are obliged to teach spelling.

> Hi there,

> I'm British and always use British English spelling when I write.

> When I write in Logo, (or any other computer language) I use whatever dialect of
> English the language uses.

> Tell your colleagues that Logo is not a variation of English and remind them that
> British English is now just a small dialect of the English language family. The
> world standard is US English and you are helping internationalise your students by
> introducing US spelling. Your English department colleagues ought to be doing that.

How did I get clobbered for this one. Although I should be taught what
English language is :-), I'm *not* the guy (or should I say bloke) who
complained about "inappropriate" spelling of pencolor.
But as this is basically about Logo and not about English, everybody
with the same (spelling) problem should be aware of the ease of changing
the spelling, or indeed the definition of most of built-in ucblogo
primitives.


Sat, 29 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 LOGO-L> RE: prefix/infix discussion

Quote:

> > Can I ask the gurus about one of my big bugbears- caused by pressure from
> > colleagues that are obliged to teach spelling.

Hi there,

I'm British and always use British English spelling when I write.

When I write in Logo, (or any other computer language) I use whatever dialect of
English the language uses.

Tell your colleagues that Logo is not a variation of English and remind them that
British English is now just a small dialect of the English language family. The
world standard is US English and you are helping internationalise your students by
introducing US spelling. Your English department colleagues ought to be doing that.



Sat, 29 Jun 2002 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 6 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. LOGO-L> Logo Discussions

2. LOGO-L> Infix Power operator

3. LOGO-L> Infix Power operator

4. LOGO-L> Prefix root Suffix

5. LOGO-L> Re: Prefix/suffix

6. LOGO-L> Prefix/Root/Suffix Program

7. Prefix, Infix, RPN

8. Prefix, Infix, RPN

9. infix vs. prefix (was: Points, then Finish)

10. infix vs. prefix (was: Points, then Finish)

11. Infix/Prefix and Lisp Syntax

12. Infix vs Prefix

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software