HoldMyType<p><a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/tags/systemsprogramming" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>systemsprogramming</span></a> in a domain<br>a set of solved situations keeps recurring in different patterns and work is reduced to identify a new pattern and relate the new workflow to it <br><a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/tags/physics" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>physics</span></a> with a set of theories <br>In some laws, with the same assumptions re held, one need deduce the consequences of the changes in the situation and reformulate accordingly.<br>A new situation can violate some assumptions, and it can seem entirely unrelated to previous work flow in a solution. Application from which need to be modified with some <a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/tags/math" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>math</span></a> model like binomial theorem, which is very different from a patch in <a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/tags/git" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>git</span></a> <br>So the latter is less empiricist, numerically, than the former. <br>But yes, trickier numerical can often be seen as more than one simpler numerical (s)<br>Theoretically, however, the latter is falsifiable, whereas the former simply depends on abstractions.<br>So yes, if there's a fun part in <a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/tags/programming" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>programming</span></a>, it's abstraction <br>In your face <a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/tags/ai" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>ai</span></a><br>Written with <a href="https://mathstodon.xyz/tags/languagetool" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">#<span>languagetool</span></a> AI based grammar checker</p>