# For mathematicians, = does not mean equality

DevFeed: [For mathematicians, = does not mean equality](<https://devfeed.tech/articles/for-mathematicians-does-not-mean-equality-40421.md>)

Original publisher: [Read original article](<https://www.jeremykun.com/2018/04/13/for-mathematicians-does-not-mean-equality/>)

Published: 2018-04-13T08:00:05Z

Content type: opinion

Language: en

Sources: [Jeremy Kun](<https://devfeed.tech/sources/jeremy-kun.md>)

Topics: [Mathematics](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/mathematics.md>), [equals](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/equals.md>), [Programming](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/programming.md>), [Functional programming](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/functional-programming.md>), [Algorithms](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/algorithms.md>)

Tags: [equals](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/equals.md>), [functional-programming](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/functional-programming.md>), [logic](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/logic.md>), [mathematics](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/mathematics.md>), [operator](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/operator.md>), [programming](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/programming.md>)

## AI overview

This opinion article examines how the equals symbol is used in mathematics and programming. It argues that mathematical equality is often context-dependent, while programming languages give operators such as =, ==, and === distinct documented meanings. Examples include summation notation, set-builder notation, and function definitions.

## Source excerpt

Every now and then I hear some ridiculous things about the equals symbol. Some large subset of programmers--perhaps related to functional programmers, perhaps not--seem to think that = should only and ever mean "equality in the mathematical sense." The argument usually goes, Functional programming gives us back that inalienable right to analyze things by using mathematics. Never again need we bear the burden of that foul mutant x = x+1! No novice programmer--nay, not even a mathematician!