You have a typo in [1]. It should read "A countable union of (finite or) countable sets is countable."
A "branch" here is a conditional jump. This has the issues the article mentions, which branchless programming avoids: Again, there is no branching - the instruction pointer isn't manipulated, there's no branch…
The article is right to say that set theory can serve as a foundation for almost all other mathematics, and you're also right to say that no reasonably-complex consistent system of axioms can be complete. The resolution…
I don't see how the article is pretending anything. They had platform issues with C++ (portability and usability on the platforms they supported), and switching to Rust fixed those issues but gave them a different set…
You have a typo in [1]. It should read "A countable union of (finite or) countable sets is countable."
A "branch" here is a conditional jump. This has the issues the article mentions, which branchless programming avoids: Again, there is no branching - the instruction pointer isn't manipulated, there's no branch…
The article is right to say that set theory can serve as a foundation for almost all other mathematics, and you're also right to say that no reasonably-complex consistent system of axioms can be complete. The resolution…
I don't see how the article is pretending anything. They had platform issues with C++ (portability and usability on the platforms they supported), and switching to Rust fixed those issues but gave them a different set…