X = x + 1

Dumb frog poster can’t comprehend the difference between assignment and equality.

So? It's not algebra it's programming. They're not the same thing. If you can't understand that there is no help for you.

= is assignment, not comparison

Not valid C or C++.

>imperative programming

haskell or bust

It's not an equation, it's a statement, and = is an assignment operator, not a comparison operator. Just because it looks like an equation and confuses you doesn't mean anything about it is wrong.

>Mutability BAD

Attached: trashkell_on_suicide_watch.png (580x1500, 495K)

this is not math retard

>if you can't understand that
>just because it confuses you
Spare me the reddit pre-made retorts. I understand it perfectly, I said "it's a different domain". I thought that was clear enough, but apparently not.
There are several languages without this issue like Common Lisp by the way. The world does not revolve around C.

>shits on CS
>can't comprehend the most basic concept
Imagine my shock.

The world does not revolve around your domain either. You said it's logically absurd. It's not.

>y equl sign no mean the same thing as in my elementary scol math klas?

Attached: serveimage(38).jpg (645x729, 57K)

This is actually only a thing because the retards that created C couldn't make it have a proper assignment operator (:=) without their shitware compiler running out of memory when parsing programs

= is not an equality operator, it's an assignment operator

No one likes pascal. C's one character assignment is the better option.

>CS monkeys scrambling to defend their chimp logic
Loving. Every. Laugh!

Attached: nI0BxoKl.jpg (179x170, 10K)

>the world does not revolve around math
You're joking, right? It's the single greatest creation of mankind.

Not an argument, mathlet.

There are many different ways to do math.

All these people talking about C. I know about 15 languages that all do it like this. That one hurrduuurr math-guy is the biggest idiot in the thread.

In standard computer programming languages,
= -> :=, == -> =. In actual Computer Science, you're less likely to encounter this notation except in code snippets

But seriously if you're not programming because of this silly tradition you're kind of a brainlet.

>can't comprehend that = is an assignment operator
>can't comprehend anything not taught to him by his undergrad professors
You are the mathlet, friend

>user struggles to understand variable reassignment

Name the languages of that set that were not crippled by C's influence and still make the same brain-damaged syntactic decision.

I know you're trying to sound deep and as if you had a lot of hidden knowledge, but I really don't want to argue with an anime anti-hero. In every type of arithmetics (please let this be what you meant by "several ways") x=x+1 means an unsolvable equation.
Whatever, if awkward notations get OP mad he should switch to Lisp.

Welp, the world does not revolve around arithmetics. Hope this makes it clear for you.

$((++x))

Attached: 1488893530328.gif (288x204, 1.62M)

>>Whatever, if awkward notations get OP mad he should switch to Lisp.
Is this a joke? Lisp is the ultimate awkwardness.

>can't comprehend that = is an assignment operator
>can't comprehend anything not taught to him by his undergrad professors
But I can. You're doing the whole baseless assumption thing again, I know the semantics is different, but I also understand what OP means. I thought after explaining it 3 times already you would have understood my point. But whatever, use another reddit reply, I really don't care.

This actually works the way you expect in Haskell and produces an infinite loop.

>math is the single greatest creation of mankind
>math
>creation of mankind
Imagine claiming to be a math grad and not being a platonist.

Fucking yikes!

>not crippled by C's influence
You can't even proof it the other way around and yes, I am not able to do this. Just because I know about 15 languages that have x=x+1, this doesn't mean that I know how each language came to be in the first place.
Spotted the math-guy ;) you fucking angry mongoloid ahahahaha.

Seems to be your problem, friend. We understand that it's not the same in arithmetic. We don't care. It's not meant to be a solvable equation.

You have no point. Your pointy in OP is that the sentence "x = x + 1" is logically absurd. That's false. It's only absurd if you read it making incorrect assumptions.

>the world does not revolve around arithmetics.
Trust me, you have no idea what you're talking about.

I used to say that. We only think that way because we learned the declarative syntax type first. Lisp makes a lot more sense, especially if you come from maths.

Math is a deductice language, languages are creations.
Also I'm not OP, I just love math.

>Lisp is the ultimate awkwardness
Lisp is literally just f(x) but made easier to modify with itself.
It's the only language that has universal notation with zero edge cases and zero special rules.

Thats because they mean different things in math and logic, which are different disciplines. Its not that hard to figure out, even with a lowly math degree.
In code, a single equals is typically "assignment". For equality you want "=="
See? Easy.

>Trust me
how about no

>Lisp makes a lot more sense
yeah the person who is triggered by x = x + 1 will love looking at ((call/cc call/cc) (call/cc call/cc)) and at how much it makes sense from arithmetic standpoint amazing!

I never said anything that disagrees with what you said.
>your point in OP
I kind of remember specifically saying I am not OP. Also
>your have no point
>your point is
Kek.

Did you even do lisp at all? All those variations have all kinds of special rules.

It does. I don't understand how you can't see it.

Then I am not talking to you, dumbass.

Like what?

You've been replying to my posts for a while, you just thought I was OP.

>I'm the one with the math degree and you're not.
then you would know that it's not a fucking equation.

t. EE/applied math patrician

It has nothing to do with arithmetic.

>arbitrary
I dont think you know what that word means. Its extremely logical when you know what the components of the operation mean...

x++

inc(x)
succ(x)

Oh this HAS to be b8.
Unless you actually are a math autist trying to cope with the fact that your degree doesn't mean shit in the employed world.

I'm OP and your argument proves you cannot even into basic logic. For example, you argued with a guy you assumed was me. That is not necessarily the case...

How about this: I write the fancy mathematical equations and get famous and you can do coding and be my stepping stool? Your major is inferior to mine.

Explain what "x+1" does without using any concepts from arithmetics.

>I write the fancy mathematical equations and get famous
Famous? If you do, by some wild improbability, manage to make a meaningful contribution to the field of mathematics, the only people that will know your name are other people going to school for math.

Whatever helps you cope with the fact that good developers (who are much smarter than you) are making $300k+ at actual famous companies.

both OP, trying the "the other retard wasn't me" tactic, failing.
"it adds 1 to x"

Bruh. Good programming takes no IQ at all. You've never set foot in a upper division math classroom, what makes you the authority on intelligent people? Lmfao...

I know this might sound amazing, but it's possible for more than one person to disagree with you. Which isn't even the case because I do get that programming isn't a 1:1 mapping of arithmetics and that the semantics is different, but it's been about 20 minutes so I doubt THIS time you'll get it.

>without using any concepts of arithmetics
>it adds 1 to x
>adds
And you're wrong anyway, "x+1" is an expression, it doesn't add anything TO x, it adds x and 1 and returns the value, x doesn't change.

Forgot pic, photoshop accusations incoming.

Attached: Screenshot_20190424-182155_Clover.png (1080x2160, 245K)

Would you be happy if it was x := x + 1?

why do mathfags struggle so hard with the fact there are only so many keys on a keyboard. computers are general purpose machines, they can't come with a peripheral dedicated entirely to convoluted math notations. if you retards were half as good at math as you claim to be you would be posting on /sci/ and not Jow Forums. you're just failed cs students trying to cope with the fact you couldn't even hack it at basic logic and linguistics.

Anyways I believe you.

Attached: hashtags.png (1805x274, 67K)

>they can't come with a peripheral dedicated entirely to convoluted math notations.
>addition
>declaration
>convoluted
There are a lot of brainlets in this thread, but you're crayon-munching dumb.

but x=x+1 changes x. You can't program, I totally understand that this must be confusing if you never saw this. No problem, we are here to help retards every day.

Since you're the 200IQ individual, I'll let you figure out why good programmers make $200k+.

I think you mean languages with C like syntax are retarded brainlet op. Not all languages use the = sign for assignment.

We will call some arbitrary amount of objects "x". Then, "x+1" is what we will call that group of objects when another object is put in the group.

Concrete example: let x represent ||||, here x+1 represents |||||

Attached: stinky.jpg (874x722, 131K)

No it isn't it leads to dumb errors because it's to simmilar to the equality statement. It's worse in every way. Dumb cnile.

Have you ever heard of a preprocessor?

Either its BAIT or u are retarded...

>x takes the value of x +1
>"Bro this is so logically absurd wtf!"
What's tripping you up? I'm sure we can help you out.

>why do mathfags struggle so hard with the fact there are only so many keys on a keyboard.
That doesn't explain Cs trash syntac it all. It could just be := , or even

Preprocessor directives still have to follow valid C/++ conventions. You are creating an identifier alias "

>but x=x+1 changes x
But that's not the statement I typed, was it? You couldn't even read 3 letters properly, but you're already jumping on your generic insults once more. And you conveniently glossed over the fact that addition is an operation of arithmetic. Go on, I'm waiting for you to explain what x+1 (or the assignment) without using arithmetics.

I get that you arbitrated a new language, and that's fine, but then you're doing the same thing OP did: cherry picking a domain. I can also state x+1 prints "hello world" on the console, but that's also outside the scope of this. For reference, let's assume the C standard.

Lol, just work as a quant trader/dev/researcher at a hedge fund. You'll make more money than the FANG cucks.

I should say that this is valid.
#define be =
#define let

let int x be 42;

Attached: ozoi5.jpg (384x384, 41K)

Some languages still use those. Lisp is a lot more expressive about it.
But you're posting on a forum where most people only learned the C standard. Maybe they once had to do a CS project in Lisp, but it made them confused - which is normal, but being used to A doesn't make B bad. So when someone tells them that there are other languages where this ambiguity doesn't exist, they don't care.
I still prefer
let x=1

Hmmm it's quite simple: how much you get paid doesn't determine your worth. Barack Obama gets paid millions of dollars and he's an idiot.

How is this difficult??
= means "is now equal to". The primary function of a C is to write a program that performs operations, not to solve equations like a calculator.

>x = x + 1
>x += 1
>x++
choose your logic

heh faggot op would rather it be:
let y = x + 1
let x = y
yeah, that's so much better, you fucking moron

>let's assume the C standard.
I explained what x + 1 does in the C standard. I have no reason to specify what happens in the 'bare metal' as that is implementation dependent. You are confusing representation with abstract behavior.

>(((($$$)))

Attached: 1492949151240.png (219x186, 16K)

x+1 adds 1 to x.
x=5
echo $(($x+1))

Enjoy this little bash. It literally does "x+1" and prints it.

typing and parsing ":=" or "

Stupid frogposter doesn't know the difference between variable assignment and equivalence

Attached: oC344ws.png (230x219, 7K)

I know you're being facetious, but yes, that's much better.

>I explained what x + 1 does in the C standard.
Show me the part of the C standard where "x+1" does that. I mean it's a standard, it's publicly available, it should be there.
>I have no reason to specify what happens in the 'bare metal' as that is implementation dependent.
I'm not asking you to explain what code gcc returns, just the standard (which gcc kind of has to follow).

call/cc has nothing to do with arithmetics you dumbo

Not everyone can be a pilot, or a doctor, or a programmer.
Social Studies are this way.
>>>/reddit/r/feminism

var i = 0
for(x=0;x

Parsing

Ok, then answer my question.

OP blown the fuck out by a bash oneliner and some explanation.