> I'm confused. Maybe you posted the wrong link?
No, you're just confused. You mentioned the two statements in that link, but you have only described one. The other statement you referred to is from my original comment.
No, you're just confused. You mentioned the two statements in that link, but you have only described one. The other statement you referred to is from my original comment.
FWIW Your original statement is referentially transparent wrt the meaning of 'writing' an algorithm ("I specifically referred..."). You were clarifying what you meant by this phrase. So the substitution of your intended meaning into your original statement is justified; in fact, is the entire purpose of your clarification. Otherwise you're just giving a definition with absolutely no context or purpose.
That essence is something you and I have in common. I believe this thread sprouted because of how my original comment was interpreted. I think you are the first HN reader to actually give a decent word for word analysis of my comments. A lot of the time I just have to endure obvious misinterpretations, elaborations, misquotes or sometimes just plain fabrications. It's good to come across someone who takes time to read boring old English.