Warning: mkdir(): No space left on device in /var/www/group-telegram/post.php on line 37

Warning: file_put_contents(aCache/aDaily/post/doujinshi_ss/--): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /var/www/group-telegram/post.php on line 50
同人誌 „state surfing“ | Telegram Webview: doujinshi_ss/243 -
Telegram Group & Telegram Channel
Okay, but what if there is actually no way to tell 1 and 2 apart? Then we would actually say that are observationally equivalent! Observational equivalence captures the idea of what it means for two things to be indistinguishable inside a programming language.

Now how does all of this relate to expressiveness? I'll return to the question:
Is it possible to distinguish between 2 * 3 and 3 + 3?

My answer: It depends on the features of the language! It certainly is not possible in the language which only has basic arithmetic, functions and recursion.
Can you think of a feature we could add where it is possible to distinguish them?

Operator overloading! Say we have operator overloading and the ability to redefine existing function. If we overload * to do something weird, like return the first argument but we don't overload +. We can now distinguish between those two expressions!

By adding that feature, we broke an observational equivalence. The expressions 2 * 3 and 3 + 3 used to be observationally equivalent. Then we added operator overloading and now they are observationally distinct.

Now we need to address how to tell if a feature requires a "local" transformation vs "global" transformation :
If feature X can be implemented for language L as a local transformation to obtain the language L+X, then for any two expressions e1 and e2 that are observationally equivalent in L, it is also the case that they are observationally equivalent in L+X

This is saying that if feature X only required a local transformation to implement, then it did not "break" any observational equivalences. All of the observational equivalences from L are still true in L+X.
Note that this was not the case for operator overloading. Adding operator overloading did break some observational equivalences. On the other hand, when we added unary negation we did not break any observational equivalences.
Now we can say that when we add expressiveness to a language, we break some observational equivalences.



group-telegram.com/doujinshi_ss/243
Create:
Last Update:

Okay, but what if there is actually no way to tell 1 and 2 apart? Then we would actually say that are observationally equivalent! Observational equivalence captures the idea of what it means for two things to be indistinguishable inside a programming language.

Now how does all of this relate to expressiveness? I'll return to the question:
Is it possible to distinguish between 2 * 3 and 3 + 3?

My answer: It depends on the features of the language! It certainly is not possible in the language which only has basic arithmetic, functions and recursion.
Can you think of a feature we could add where it is possible to distinguish them?

Operator overloading! Say we have operator overloading and the ability to redefine existing function. If we overload * to do something weird, like return the first argument but we don't overload +. We can now distinguish between those two expressions!

By adding that feature, we broke an observational equivalence. The expressions 2 * 3 and 3 + 3 used to be observationally equivalent. Then we added operator overloading and now they are observationally distinct.

Now we need to address how to tell if a feature requires a "local" transformation vs "global" transformation :
If feature X can be implemented for language L as a local transformation to obtain the language L+X, then for any two expressions e1 and e2 that are observationally equivalent in L, it is also the case that they are observationally equivalent in L+X

This is saying that if feature X only required a local transformation to implement, then it did not "break" any observational equivalences. All of the observational equivalences from L are still true in L+X.
Note that this was not the case for operator overloading. Adding operator overloading did break some observational equivalences. On the other hand, when we added unary negation we did not break any observational equivalences.
Now we can say that when we add expressiveness to a language, we break some observational equivalences.

BY 同人誌 „state surfing“


Warning: Undefined variable $i in /var/www/group-telegram/post.php on line 260

Share with your friend now:
group-telegram.com/doujinshi_ss/243

View MORE
Open in Telegram


Telegram | DID YOU KNOW?

Date: |

Multiple pro-Kremlin media figures circulated the post's false claims, including prominent Russian journalist Vladimir Soloviev and the state-controlled Russian outlet RT, according to the DFR Lab's report. For tech stocks, “the main thing is yields,” Essaye said. At its heart, Telegram is little more than a messaging app like WhatsApp or Signal. But it also offers open channels that enable a single user, or a group of users, to communicate with large numbers in a method similar to a Twitter account. This has proven to be both a blessing and a curse for Telegram and its users, since these channels can be used for both good and ill. Right now, as Wired reports, the app is a key way for Ukrainians to receive updates from the government during the invasion. Additionally, investors are often instructed to deposit monies into personal bank accounts of individuals who claim to represent a legitimate entity, and/or into an unrelated corporate account. To lend credence and to lure unsuspecting victims, perpetrators usually claim that their entity and/or the investment schemes are approved by financial authorities. "The argument from Telegram is, 'You should trust us because we tell you that we're trustworthy,'" Maréchal said. "It's really in the eye of the beholder whether that's something you want to buy into."
from us


Telegram 同人誌 „state surfing“
FROM American