>>21
Logical fallacy. Welcome to tier-3.
Apparently your understanding of `logic' is lacking. If the definition in
>>16 applies to me, which it does, then, by definition, I'm a `mathematical programmer' in the sense of post
>>16. I don't think it makes much sense.
>>16 is most likely some asshole mathematician who happens to also be a decent programmer, and erroneously attributes this to mathematics. Nothing in the description of `mathematical programmers' requires knowing any real mathematics.