Post #4436508
2026-08-06 14:43 UTC
Replies (1)
-
@FishFace@ioc.exchange 2026-08-07 08:35
@glynwolf@tiggi.es @IceWolf@masto.brightfur.net but left associativity is itself a notational convention. It's not a fundamental property of division: you can't prove that the division operation has this property, you have to decide you're going to follow the convention, and could choose not to. Furthermore, left associativity does not help you in a mixed expression like 12÷3×4. The author is using a nonstandard definition of left associativity and if you look it up on Wikipedia or in a textbook you will see it gives you that a÷b÷c = (a÷b)÷c, but doesn't say what to do when you have a multiplication instead of a second division. In our schooling, left associativity of division is a consequence of our order of operations conventions which say directly to do multiplication and division in order from left to right. If you do this with a÷b÷c you can see you immediately get (a÷b)÷c! Examples where this order is not chosen include: * Reverse polish notation * Calculators which evaluate strictly left to right (used to be the only way calculators worked) * Strange programming languages like APL * Dutch classrooms until they agreed to use the more common order (they used to do multiplication before division) If left associativity were an inherent property of division, none of these would actually be capable of doing division, yet somehow they are.