LadyButterfly she/her@piefed.blahaj.zone to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 8 hours agoI dunnopiefed.cdn.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square90fedilinkarrow-up1303arrow-down134
arrow-up1269arrow-down1imageI dunnopiefed.cdn.blahaj.zoneLadyButterfly she/her@piefed.blahaj.zone to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 8 hours agomessage-square90fedilink
minus-squareExtremeDullard@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up44arrow-down1·8 hours ago5 isn’t a valid function name, is obviously the right answer.
minus-squaremarcos@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·44 minutes agoI’m pretty sure that’s a module operator…
minus-squaregnutrino@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·edit-21 hour agoIt could be a Church Numeral
minus-squareTheRedSpade@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up13·8 hours agoHow can you be sure it’s not defined when we only see one line?
minus-squareVoroxpete@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down1·edit-24 hours agoThey didn’t say it’s not defined, they said it’s not a valid name. Most languages don’t allow function names to start with a number, so 5 literally cannot be a function if that’s the case. But that’s assuming this isn’t some really obscure language.
5 isn’t a valid function name, is obviously the right answer.
I’m pretty sure that’s a module operator…
It could be a Church Numeral
How can you be sure it’s not defined when we only see one line?
They didn’t say it’s not defined, they said it’s not a valid name. Most languages don’t allow function names to start with a number, so 5 literally cannot be a function if that’s the case.
But that’s assuming this isn’t some really obscure language.