On 25Sep2020 0259, xxxxxx@gmail.com wrote:
> You are correct.
>
> HOWEVER, having said that, there are ways to write it that can easily
> be screwed up if one forgets the order between division and
> multiplication (as I did) and there are ways to write it that are not
> subject to that mistake at all.
>
> For instance Lb=V÷100TLm is order dependent (if I multiply the 100 x
> TLm first, the answer is wrong).
> by comparison...
> Lb=VTLm÷100 is NOT subject to an order dependence between
> multiplication and divisions (If you divide first, you'd still do V *
> (TLm/100) which is right, and if you do multiplication first, you'd do
> (V * TLm) ÷ 100 which would still work)
>
> So, at the least, it isn't an optimal way to write it to avoid that
> fairly common error.
>
> But yes, it is correct, if not optimal, as written.
I agree with you. At the least, Lb=V÷100TLm can easily be read as having
100TLm as a single entity, rather than two separate entities. So yes,
not as clear as it could be.

--
Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>