Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » Education » math-teach

Topic: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Replies: 26   Last Post: Oct 20, 2012 12:26 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
kirby urner

Posts: 1,528
Registered: 11/29/05
Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Posted: Oct 17, 2012 5:38 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply
att1.html (3.2 K)

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Paul Tanner <upprho@gmail.com> wrote:

> You started generalizing beyond coffee with your "Functional or "to
> one" relationships are pretty well understood today, no need to imbue
> them with mystical powers of action, or connotations of "belonging to"
> or "contained within"" and such, and so the general definitions of
> functions are now in play.
>


You should think of objects as members of a set, or likewise members in
memory. Each member has its attributes.

For example, if you're "2", a member of the set Z (integers) then your
blueprint / template includes circuitry / a recipe for "adding".

You, "2" and another member of your set, say "5", both have the add method
such that:

2.add(5) and/or 5.add(2) make plenty of sense. The Z type of object knows
"adding", i.e. the behavior "to add" belongs to the integer type.

In reality, I'm writing in a generic dot notation that doesn't exist. 2
.__add__(5) is how you'd write in in Python, but really 2 + 5, with +
triggering __add__, is the expected syntax.


>
> And this includes not in terms just of what sets are and are not in
> play but of how formulas are related to the use of the term
> "function". Some uses of the term refer to the formulas that determine
> the set of outputs, and even refer to the output itself as in "y is a
> function of x" and so on.
>


Sets tend to be over-valued thanks to Russell-Whitehead. They allow only
unique items, no duplicates. That's a restriction we don't always need.

In any case, I recognize sets as a good place to start using dot notation,
with S.intersection(T) or S & T representing members in common, another set.

S.union(T) would be their combined elements with no duplicates. So again,
an object with a behavior (union, intersection) and taking an argument
(another set).

Python 3.2.3 (v3.2.3:3d0686d90f55, Apr 10 2012, 11:09:56)
[GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5493)] on darwin
Type "copyright", "credits" or "license()" for more information.
>>> setA = {"A", "B", "C"}
>>> setB = {"B", "C", "R", "Q"}
>>> setA.union(setB)

{'A', 'Q', 'C', 'B', 'R'}
>>> setA.intersection(setB)
{'C', 'B'}

More than your TI calculator will do, and for free. Free download.

Raspberry Pi is for like $35 and will do this, but you still need keyboard
and monitor.

Parents? Any input? You live in a democracy remember? (ironic joke).

Kirby


Date Subject Author
10/7/12
Read In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/13/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/15/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/13/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/16/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/16/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Paul A. Tanner III
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Paul A. Tanner III
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Robert Hansen
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Louis Talman
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Robert Hansen
10/18/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Louis Talman
10/18/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Robert Hansen
10/18/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/17/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/19/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/19/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Robert Hansen
10/19/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/19/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner
10/19/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Joe Niederberger
10/20/12
Read Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
kirby urner

Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.