Content deleted Content added
Assessment: Computing: importance=Top, software=y, software-importance=Top, science=y, science-importance=Top, class=B; Computer science: class=B (assisted) |
Andy Dingley (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 121:
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 22:04, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Any thoughts on [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Functional_programming&diff=892619256&oldid=892561226 this]? {[tq|Removed the inaccurate use of idempotent. Having the same function output for a value x is injectivity, not idempotency. The article declared that calling f twice with the same value x produces f(x) each time. This is just a claim on uniqueness. This is equivalent to saying that: for x, y in D and function f: D -> co(D), that if f(x) = f(y), then x=y. This is precisely injectivity. If functional languages acted as f(f(x)) = f(x), then for any value x, a function of x would be identical to its...}}
{{ping|2600:1009:B112:79C8:75D8:597D:23FC:A3A4}} [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 21:22, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
| |||