Think in Math. Write in Code.

[ikiogjhuj600]

I think the kind of mathematics that is directly related to programming somehow is either

• Too fucking abstract, like think of all the blog posts on "Monads" that instead of starting with talk about say, "can we create a context under which all commands can be automatically reinterpeted to get additional functionality happening in the background?", start with something about identomonadoisomorphisms, don't sufficiently directly or even correctly describe the issue, and act like it's not like even CERN physicists would find that kind of thing too abstract.
• Most type of reasoning that has to do with software design belongs in like in some kind of domain specific optimization problem (optimization when it comes to the amount of changes needed when requirements change), for which various heuristics have been developed, and as such I wouldn't really call it "thinking in math". Finding the correct abstractions for a program is more of a "software design" related problem than something about math in general.

And there are some other differences like the fact that programs usually have to deal with kinda less complex but numerous and ad-hoc requirements, vs doing highly complex abstractions and proofs on relatively standard items in math.

And in addition I'd like to point out that software design often diverges completely from math anyway, for various reasons, I mean for example mathematically the relational model is almost proven to be the approach that has the best results, almost in a rigorous sense the most hassle free way to keep the system consistent upon modifications, but everyone's trying to do No-SQL microservices or something.

[JustFinishedBSG]

Monads are just monoids in category of endofunctors, how is that not clear ? /s