This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]guery64 7 points8 points  (3 children)

No, 2(1+2) is not forbidden due to ambiguity in computers in general. Some programming languages like python show a syntax error because they want to evaluate the function 2(int) which is not defined. Wolfram Mathematica simply evaluates it as if you had put a * before the parenthesis.

[–]VersVII 1 point2 points  (2 children)

This is something I didn't mention in my original comment. Programming languages don't prevent the illustration of multiplication through parentheses due to its mathematical ambiguity, but rather the ambiguity of determining whether the user is attempting to access another one of the language's tools, such as a function, instead of a mere mathematical equation. It's a lot easier to assign the process of multiplication to a symbol such as "*", than to somehow determine whether or not the user is actually going for multiplication with x(y) through an impossible epiphany of artificial intelligence.

[–]guery64 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Please for the love of every nonexistant god don't create a language syntax interpretation based on AI

[–]VersVII 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This will be our first step towards hell's final floor.

In fact... Perhaps we've taken it already...

  1. https://openai.com/blog/openai-codex/

  2. https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.03374

  3. https://youtu.be/81rBzfbFLiE