For me, programming is math because nowhere else in my experience do I have the degree of certainty that I have in programming. The article seems to think that calculus is the archetype of mathematics, but integers are mathematical objects as well. As natural numbers, 1+1=2 - always. Just like programming. Except the natural numbers never fail due to a failed disk drive, power supply, fan, electrostatic discharge, etc, HOWEVER, those externalities are never a part of programming (just as sleep deprivation is never part of mathematics) unless you're explicitly modelling failures, and in that case, you're making a mathematical model of a system that includes failures. Outside of programming and mathematics, entities and operations on them are usually much less reliable.<p>When you program, you manipulate a mathematical object, not the physical embodiment of that object. If you're dealing with the physical embodiment, you're a chip designer. Even at the level of FPGAs, your dealing more with the mathematical model of the device than with the details of the device itself.