Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

948

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (63).
[–] • 1 pt

True. I recall a similar post some time ago that sparked a conversation about the order of operations. I did a quick search and didn't find what I was thinking of, so maybe I'm mistaken. It boiled down to some not using PEMDAS correctly.

If I'm taking a note for later I'll write something like this as 230 - (220 * 0.5) just to make sure I don't trip myself by not looking close.

[–] • 1 pt

I'll give you a hint: Read it even more closely.

(There's also a spoiler in the comments.)

[–] • 3 pts

You got me. I missed the bang!

[–] • 0 pt

No one's questioning whether the pedantic order of operations leads to 5. The ambiguity is whether the equation was intended to be written in that form, or whether it was a limitation of typography, which generally doesn't allow you to write proper equations.