2 replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
source | link

I interpret the total lack of response by the OP to commentors/answerers as a sign of bad faith.

As for the points in Nick's meta question, if this were a specific question - namely the one in the subject - then the answer would be "SIX". Nine minus five plus two is six.

If the question is "why don't calculators follow that rule?", then the answer* is "they do, mostly".

But what is the motivation for this question? A guy "learns" about BODMAS - enough to be giving us reminders! - and then ... well I don't know. It could have been a simple mistake, but then again, he could have just said so. He didn't. Bad faith.

The fault is not in it being a basic question. Many borderline questions (thisthis comes to mind) have been asked and answered.


*Back when the 48÷2(9+3) thing hit the internets, I was active on 4 forums that were spammed with that garbage. One interesting revelation (I think from physicsforums.com/org/something) was that different math software interpreted the ambiguity of 48/2(12) differently.

/drunken rant

I interpret the total lack of response by the OP to commentors/answerers as a sign of bad faith.

As for the points in Nick's meta question, if this were a specific question - namely the one in the subject - then the answer would be "SIX". Nine minus five plus two is six.

If the question is "why don't calculators follow that rule?", then the answer* is "they do, mostly".

But what is the motivation for this question? A guy "learns" about BODMAS - enough to be giving us reminders! - and then ... well I don't know. It could have been a simple mistake, but then again, he could have just said so. He didn't. Bad faith.

The fault is not in it being a basic question. Many borderline questions (this comes to mind) have been asked and answered.


*Back when the 48÷2(9+3) thing hit the internets, I was active on 4 forums that were spammed with that garbage. One interesting revelation (I think from physicsforums.com/org/something) was that different math software interpreted the ambiguity of 48/2(12) differently.

/drunken rant

I interpret the total lack of response by the OP to commentors/answerers as a sign of bad faith.

As for the points in Nick's meta question, if this were a specific question - namely the one in the subject - then the answer would be "SIX". Nine minus five plus two is six.

If the question is "why don't calculators follow that rule?", then the answer* is "they do, mostly".

But what is the motivation for this question? A guy "learns" about BODMAS - enough to be giving us reminders! - and then ... well I don't know. It could have been a simple mistake, but then again, he could have just said so. He didn't. Bad faith.

The fault is not in it being a basic question. Many borderline questions (this comes to mind) have been asked and answered.


*Back when the 48÷2(9+3) thing hit the internets, I was active on 4 forums that were spammed with that garbage. One interesting revelation (I think from physicsforums.com/org/something) was that different math software interpreted the ambiguity of 48/2(12) differently.

/drunken rant

1
source | link

I interpret the total lack of response by the OP to commentors/answerers as a sign of bad faith.

As for the points in Nick's meta question, if this were a specific question - namely the one in the subject - then the answer would be "SIX". Nine minus five plus two is six.

If the question is "why don't calculators follow that rule?", then the answer* is "they do, mostly".

But what is the motivation for this question? A guy "learns" about BODMAS - enough to be giving us reminders! - and then ... well I don't know. It could have been a simple mistake, but then again, he could have just said so. He didn't. Bad faith.

The fault is not in it being a basic question. Many borderline questions (this comes to mind) have been asked and answered.


*Back when the 48÷2(9+3) thing hit the internets, I was active on 4 forums that were spammed with that garbage. One interesting revelation (I think from physicsforums.com/org/something) was that different math software interpreted the ambiguity of 48/2(12) differently.

/drunken rant