Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

็ำัHey! This is not math forum.
Let google make a judment.
http://www.google.co.th/search?rlz=1C1A ... %2B1%2B1*0

Shit, we'd have 10 million lines of code that wouldn't compile if that was changed.

It wouldn't stop them compiling, what it would do is totally guarantee that the code produced would be the same regardless of the compiler used, which is why misra, lint and DO178B insist on it.

What I meant is you can set certain warnings to be compile errors (we crank them up sometimes where it makes sense and may avoid errors later) and if we set that one as an error then our code would need lots more parentheses.

I assume you guys do like beer?
After few Australian beer, it can be whatever you want it to be.
So, go ahead and have few more. Then maybe 13

Yup, I have had a number of contracts that have been to turn old "unsafe" code into "safe" code.
Parentheses are usually the first step.

yep I would go with 13

yep +1 for 13...

This isnt interesting.
This reminds me of people that still think the world is flat.
The answer is 13.
There is no such thing as assumed brackets.
We all know what happens when we assume.

There are 1+1+1*0 types of people in this world.
Those that know maths, and those that dont.

So Werdna... what processing steps did you take to determine the answer...

Did you add/subtract the numbers from left to right... or did you multiply the "1*0" first... and then do the rest...

I followed the bimdas rule.
Calculate inside brackets first.
Then Indices
Then Multiplication and Division.
Then Addition and Subtraction.

If you want to test the rule, go into Excel, click on a cell, and type =1+1+1*0.
If the cell result is 0, I am wrong, but you will get a 2.
It is basic maths.

So.. as there were no brackets, or indices.. in the example... you multiplied the 1*0 first... then did the addition and subtraction...

ie... 1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1-1+1+1+1+1+(1*0)
ie..............you did this part first....

Or even last.... Assuming there was effectively a "bracket"....

And yes, I'm sure, and not disputing... that computational calculators, and spreadsheets...

All follow the same rule.... which assumes/implies... a bracketed order of operation... the multiplication first...

The same example could have been written.... as above... and would have been totally unambigouous...

1110001111000111010110101010101

It could have, but where is the fun in that?
There are less rules in maths than english, yet we seem to be able to follow them easily enough... most of the time.


What does 14927706 have to do with anything?

This whole argument is over word definition or personal application of word definitions, not math rules !