Order of operations?

Use prefix notation retards

>in no way ambiguous
Thas just wrong.
If left to right were ever an actual standard, then all computer programming languages would do it.
It just seems like a standard ecause most (but not all) programming languages fall back to it instead of throwing an error when you type some gibberish like 2/3*4, and so many people have become accustomed to just accepting any answer a computer gives them.

Is this kind of trolling really necessary?

>a standard can't be a standard because of a few exceptions
Nigger, I love inverse polish notations, but that doesn't mean I believe they are standard.

Postfix is superior

how do you even type that sideways .|. ?
its not a valid mathematical operator its a fucking calculator button used to represent division, a division bar and two placeholder dots, because just the bar would look like a minus

on my kb it's alt shift . --> ÷

...

gcalc seems to know the top-down rule while webmath does not.

>division sign

this shit should just be removed from existence

>There is no right to left or left to right.
>They did it right to left here because the 2 is attached to the parenthesis
you are just as full of shit as the left-to-right tards

it is ambiguous and has no solution unless the author personally and explicitly specified left to right as a convention in this particular context

Math major with a master's reporting in.

Operation order (or operation hierarchy as it's stupidly called in my native language) is absolute bollocks.

I repeat: operation order can suck my thick fat dick after I doggystyle her for bonus point!

It's one of those elementary math school topics that drive me crazy. It's just lazy people who don't want to put parenthesis. It's bullshit.

It basically comes from uncompatibility from different operations (like division and addition) or an operation lacking the associability property (like division)

it is funny how most people have no problems seeing that sentences like "she saw him with his binoculars" are ambiguous, but when encountering ambiguous expressions like 6/2*3 it turns into a full religious shitstorm

I do have problems with those sentences but you know what? Not only a lot of people don't, others even do that as a living.

Yeah, I'm talking about those edgy art faggots...

Also, read above, most don't even think there's ambiguity... and this is Veeky Forums

Don't all 3 have the same answer?

apply the rules

only one of them has a solution
the other two are ambiguous/malformed expressions

So Why those rules are the rules? Who made them?

americans

Exactly.

Once you add x to the numbers inside the brackets it becomes clear which way is the correct one.

[email protected]

It's obviously 1

What is wrong with this thread?

a/b(c+d) can be interpreted as

[eqn]\frac{a}{b}(c+d)[/eqn] or [eqn]\frac{a}{b(c+d)}[/eqn]

Due to ambiguity, it is a perfectly fine response to ask for clarification, but most people are too stupid in mathematics to acknowledge that you can ask for clarification on ambiguous statements in math.

AMBIGUOUS FORMATTING

FUCK OFF

Alright which is it?

8/(2(2+2))

Or

8 ÷ 2 × 2 + 2

Order of operations is a social construct. I operate where I want when I want and there isn't a single thing any of you nerds can do about it.

8/2*(2+2)

-Parentheses first so: 2+2 is computed first which results in 4
-Then what you have left is 8/2*4
Since division and multiplication are on the same level of priority you compute left to right: 8/2 which results in 4
-Then what you have left is 4*4
Which results in 16

>Since division and multiplication are on the same level of priority you compute left to right
no

PEMDAS, yes

Not an argument.

delet this

Ok i came up with 1 using PEMDAS. However, if you use the european BIDMAS, you get 16. Which is right? Does multiplication or division come first? The two acronyms disagree on that.

that is a convenient lie told to highschoolers

neither
you have to accept that there is no solution because of ambiguity

Citation needed.

Anglos are literal retards that needs ridiculous acronyms for the simplest of things.
Examples: PEMDAS and SOH CAH TOA

Division and multiplication are done in the order they appear. Just like addition and subtraction. Multiplication/Division, however, is done before addition/subtraction.

the very definition of these basic operators being binary taking two arguments

(a op b) or similarly if you use postfix

once you start removing parentheses you quickly run the risk of ambiguous expressions

even 1+2*3 is ambiguous strictly speaking, but at least multiplication has a (relatively) more widespread acceptance as being higher precedence than addition.

"left to right" is not even close to a convention

This is not a poem, fucktard
>2x2=7
>hurr durr i say so

it actually is

>tfw you will never be able to express or even grasp mathematical concepts without using an ambiguous language as an abstraction layer

Do you even know what operator associativity is?

two different expressions being the same by virtue of the operators in question
(a + (b + c)) vs ((a + b) + c)

it did not necessarily have to be this way, but it is. Does not mean that (a + b + c) is not ambiguous still, it just so happens that associativity results in these two expressions evaluating to the same expression

okay... i can see how left to right is not a real precedence. but it's typically just a tool used to keep beginners organized. pemdas is a law that must be followed though for algebraic equations to be solved correctly.

>pemdas is a law that must be followed though for algebraic equations to be solved correctly.
hardly

you're a fucking idiot.

why would you say that? it's a developed system... just like every other mathematical system we've created to access a international product.

written maths is just an encoding attempting to represent the actual maths, order of operations do not really exist in the actual abstract mathematical system, they are just a consequence of encoding the maths into linear text.

you unapologetically stupid retard

holy shit that's funny

1/2/3 = (1/2)/3 = 1/6 and NOT 1/(2/3) = 3/2

Q: Why is it that robots don't seem to have such problems?
A: They can correctly parse single line notation.
Q: Will Common Core cure this juvenile ignorance?
A: Yes, both results will be declared equally correct.

the answer is 1, wow

>ambiguous expressions like 6/2*3

How is it ambiguous? Left-to-right evaluation.

>Left-to-right evaluation.
how do you know that is what I intended when I wrote it?

Arithmetic has well defined order of operations. In the absence of any notes to the contrary any reasonable person would assume that you are following convention.

except that there is no such convention with operators of the same precedence, that is just highschoolers spouting stuff

It's the convention used in all calculators and modern programming languages. So yes, it is a convention.

because calculators necessarily have to chose some way to evaluate ambiguous expressions

if it gave syntax errors every time you did not add parentheses people would get really annoyed

1

moreso

when you put stuff in a calculator you usually do not intend others to read the intermediate expressions, so ambiguities affect other people less since you usually know what you are doing

the same to some degree applies to programs, but parentheses are sometimes skipped to make long expressions less cumbersome

after all programming languages are not (usually) mathematics, they are moreof a linear list of instructions to perform in a particular order

maths are more abstract
when you write papers, books, etc - ambiguity is a really big deal since you are writing to other people, encoding the maths you wish to write about in textual form

Why the fuck do you guys visit this board if you are unable to do even elementary math?

>This does not mean that multiplication takes precedence over division, however. In the absence of parentheses, multiplication and division are performed left to right. We say that multiplication and division are left associative.

cs.utah.edu/~zachary/isp/worksheets/operprec/operprec.html

>after all programming languages are not (usually) mathematics, they are moreof a linear list of instructions to perform in a particular order

Programs are mathematical proofs, so yes programming languages are mathematics.

this is fine for that particular programming language/programming environment

They have clearly established that operators of similar precedence are evaluated left to right by the interpreter/compiler/during syntactic analysis, so there is no problem here as that is part of their language standard

the problem is when you try to take someones particular convention for a particular context and apply it to a different context where that convention does not at all apply

Where are you getting the ambiguity from?

Google tells you it's left-to-right

Wolfram Alpha tells you it's left-to-right

Every fucking calculator and programming language tells you it's left-to-right

Where are you getting the ambiguity from?

because google and wolfram alpha are all calculators/programming environments

actual maths require you to be unambiguous when you encode it into text because there is no left to right convention or top down convention that your readers that are supposed to decode the expression can follow.

wolfram alpha even shows you how it interpreted what you wrote just incase its interpretation is not what you intended

people who read your mathematical writings do not really always have the convenience of asking you directly if you mean what they think you mean in the cases where you were ambiguous

I don't see the ambiguity in this sentence. Could you explain it to me?

well the first is whether him and his refer to the same person
then there is the interpretation where she used his binoculars to see him
then there is the interpretation that she saw him while she was holding his binoculars but not necessarily using them
then there is the interpretation that she saw him and his binoculars

there might be other subtle ones too

Citation needed.

Thanks,English is so weird.

All my life, in every school I've been they taught me that such stuff defaults to 8/(2(2+2)), unless specified otherwise obviously. Basically whatever's infront of the paranthesis, goes with the paranthesis, so this also equals to 8/(4+4)

Used it all my life, and never had an issue.

its 16 for (8/2)*(2+2)...

>Google tells you it's left-to-right
>Wolfram Alpha tells you it's left-to-right
Back in the 1970's, the nuns at Sacred Heart taught there was no left-to-right or right-to-left in precedence of operations, and that only godless sinners would write something like 8/2*4.
See also: RPN.
Besides, if it L2R were part of the PEDMAS standard, why isn't it in the acronym?
Finally, the only support for L2R in the Wikipedia article is:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Programming_languages
>In addition, because many operators are not associative, the order within any single level is usually defined by grouping left to right
>usually
Note that this applies to programming languages in particular, and not pure math.
The only mention of L2R in relation to math itself is:
>Stacked exponents are applied from the top down, i.e., from right to left.[1][4]

>Back in the 1970's, the nuns at Sacred Heart taught there was no left-to-right or right-to-left in precedence of operations, and that only godless sinners would write something like 8/2*4.

Irrelevant to current global trend.

>See also: RPN.

Also irrelevant to the current global trend.

Show us examples where other operator precedence rules are used on a global scale, currently.

i actually take back what i said, and fuck anyone who posts this incomplete bait shit anymore. you use acutal fractions in problem anyways, so you will never encounter this. i think im tripping over the paranthesis shit i mentioned.

...

>Irrelevant to current global trend.
>implying math should be subject to fashion trends

>Show us examples where other operator precedence rules are used on a global scale, currently.
>other operator precedence rules
In case you're not following, you're arguing for the existence of a rule (L2R), while I'm claiming your rule enjoys de-facto status because "everybody" uses it, even though there's no authoritative support for the idea.
But since you asked nicely...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations#Programming_languages
>in APL, evaluation is strictly right to left
Also, Smalltalk, LISP, PostScript and several other languages don't use L2R.

>Also, Smalltalk, LISP, PostScript and several other languages don't use L2R.
p.s.: "pure" Pascal doesn't use L2R either, but few (if any) current versions will shit the bed on something like 6/2*3.

Didn't the guy use the wrong division symbol for trolling? The entire argument revolves around 8/2 being a separate fraction like in . There's no argument by removing the ambiguity.

take
[math]A=2+2 \\
8/2(2+2) \\
=8/2(A)\\
=8/2A
[/math]
now consider
[math]
1/2\pi
[/math]
like in Fourier Transformation
"obviously" this is [math]
1/(2\pi)
[/math]
so
[math]
=8/2A \\
=8/(2A) \\
=8/8 \\
=1
[/math]

you're so fucking retarded it might be infectious

The order of operations can not be used to solve this problem. In fact the expression provided is wholly invalid without an appropriate set of rules. No worthwhile mathemetician would ever express an equation as such without first defining appropriate conventions. There are no conventions to solve this type of problem which are generally agreed upon.

Why it isn't (x, x, x+y, y)?

babby's first trol

questions like this are written (deliberately) ambiguously, so that if you give one answer, someone will just counter with the other answer.

lel @ the arguing

Counterexample: take (1,1,2,2) from U and (0,0,0,5) from W. U+W clearly contains (1,1,2,7), which is not of the form (x,x,x+y,y).

Did your parents abuse when you were a child or something? Stop acting like a douche bag.

The original question had vague/incomplete notation which makes the result branch in different ways. The result depends on individual understanding of what goes under the % sign. It can encompass just the first number or the whole sequence. This is precisely why it's rarely used.

This is probably the most lucid post I've ever seen on a retarded thread like this. Thank you, user, for not being a pretentious self-important arse-hole.

8/2(2+2)=1
Clearly it's 0

>even 1+2*3 is ambiguous strictly speaking

No. It evaluates to 7 always. If you want (1+2)3 write it.

This.