David Chang’s Unified Theory of Deliciousness

Re:David Chang’s Unified Theory of Deliciousness by XaspR8d on Friday July 22, 2016 @01:18PM (#12144994)

Is the use of "isomorphic" in "isomorphic javascript" that far off? You're mapping [program, output] pairs from one environment (client) to another (server), ideally creating the same structure. Isn't that an isomorphism? Sure to be mathematically rigorous you'd have to jump through lots of hoops, but the context is closer to Hofstadter's use than abstract algebra.

I'd argue that usage is more "technically" correct than David Chang, who's referring to the _entities_ as the isomorphisms rather than the relationships between them. (Though I understand his usage and find no problem with it in the given context.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:David Chang’s Unified Theory of Deliciousness by mpjme on Friday July 22, 2016 @03:49PM (#12146284)

I think it seems like a sensible name to me:

"The term isomorphism literally means sameness (iso) of form (morphism)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isomorphism_(Gestalt_psycholog...

Perhaps the knowledgable people here (that unfortunately so far have preferred to be flippant and condescending instead of educating) could provide an explanation of showing us why "Isomorphic JavaScript" is a misnomer?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:David Chang’s Unified Theory of Deliciousness by tmzt on Friday July 22, 2016 @05:35PM (#12146936)

The grandparent's explanation seems correct.

I think the problem stems from considering the running on server and client as the entities, rather than the representation produced on the server and reinstantiated on the client as something that can be manipulated.

[ Parent | on HN ]