|
|
|
|
|
by krackers
73 days ago
|
|
I think it's similar to the case of counterfactuals, hypotheticals, or steelmaning and how well you can handle them. ("Can you accept that there can be a function named multiplyBy5 that does something else instead"). But I think if someone already is comfortable with working with abstractions such as "function" the thing is trivial, so it's a bit of a weird litmus test. |
|
I think anyone that can understand a function can understand this, but one might not be happy accepting it's the case, and endeavor to change it.
I think it can be easy to lose sight of that distinction, and eagerness to fix it can be confused with not accepting it could be, but is also probably wrong.