48/2(9+3)
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 6,592
Likes: 0
From: Yorba Linda, CA
I don't see how Programming != Math, necessarily or otherwise. Operations at the same level of precedence are customarily evaluated left-to-right; there is nothing to suggest that (9 + 3) is part of the denominator.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 6,592
Likes: 0
From: Yorba Linda, CA
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,148
Likes: 0
From: SLC, UT
Originally Posted by whiteflash' timestamp='1302562806' post='20455028
^ and thats the issue. Progamming != Math necessarily. If you do the math, it's 2. If you plug it in somewhere, depending on their programming you would get either
I don't see how Programming != Math, necessarily or otherwise. Operations at the same level of precidence are customarily evaluated left-to-right; there is nothing to suggest that (9 + 3) is part of the denominator.
If they wanted to express (9+3) as part of the denominator, they should put parenthesis around the entire denominator to express such... Otherwise, follow order of operations, left to right.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by magician' timestamp='1302568887' post='20455291
[quote name='whiteflash' timestamp='1302562806' post='20455028']
^ and thats the issue. Progamming != Math necessarily. If you do the math, it's 2. If you plug it in somewhere, depending on their programming you would get either
^ and thats the issue. Progamming != Math necessarily. If you do the math, it's 2. If you plug it in somewhere, depending on their programming you would get either
I don't see how Programming != Math, necessarily or otherwise. Operations at the same level of precidence are customarily evaluated left-to-right; there is nothing to suggest that (9 + 3) is part of the denominator.
If they wanted to express (9+3) as part of the denominator, they should put parenthesis around the entire denominator to express such... Otherwise, follow order of operations, left to right.
[/quote]
I'm surprised anyone on here understands this, let alone two people. Essentially so its easy to see:
There is no arguing this, if you think it's two, you probably are bad at math anyway.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 0
From: Jersey City, NJ
Originally Posted by YoZUpZ' timestamp='1302570355' post='20455378
[quote name='magician' timestamp='1302568887' post='20455291']
[quote name='whiteflash' timestamp='1302562806' post='20455028']
^ and thats the issue. Progamming != Math necessarily. If you do the math, it's 2. If you plug it in somewhere, depending on their programming you would get either
[quote name='whiteflash' timestamp='1302562806' post='20455028']
^ and thats the issue. Progamming != Math necessarily. If you do the math, it's 2. If you plug it in somewhere, depending on their programming you would get either
I don't see how Programming != Math, necessarily or otherwise. Operations at the same level of precidence are customarily evaluated left-to-right; there is nothing to suggest that (9 + 3) is part of the denominator.
If they wanted to express (9+3) as part of the denominator, they should put parenthesis around the entire denominator to express such... Otherwise, follow order of operations, left to right.
[/quote]
I'm surprised anyone on here understands this, let alone two people. Essentially so its easy to see:
There is no arguing this, if you think it's two, you probably are bad at math anyway.
[/quote]
48/2(9+3) has an implicit set of parenthesis around the denominator.