Aha, of course just *after* posting to the list, I managed to find this
search page with idioms selectable by APL dialect -- tucked away
within Dyalog's 'miserver' demonstration site. It allows one to see idioms
for various dialects of APL (Finn, APL2, Dyalog).

Not quite 'how to do X with vs. without forks/trains', but still quite
useful.

It seems a tenuous place to publish such a useful resource, within a sample
site that may disappear. I hope it doesn't go away...

https://miserver.dyalog.com/Examples/Applications/Idiom_Search.mipage

-Russ

On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 at 12:30, Russtopia <[email protected]> wrote:

> What is the general consensus among GNU APL users here on the newer 'tacit
> style' that seems so prevalent in many online APL resources nowadays?
> ('forks', 'trains', etc.)
>
> As a new, inexperienced APLer, exploring a bit more with GNU APL, I wonder
> if it discourages people new to APL to find, as I have, that so many
> resources online appear to be quite Dyalog-focused so the examples do not
> work as presented within GNU APL.
>
> I am aware that GNU APL is an 'APL2' implementation for the most part,
> which is fine by itself and I think it is important to have this
> open-source, free implementation. However it concerns me somewhat that
> newcomers to GNU APL may be discouraged to find so many examples online
> that are incompatible.
>
> Perhaps if I were myself experienced enough, I would write a GNU APL
> equivalent to the 'APL cart' (aplcart.info) with a focus on translating
> common idioms from 'tacit style' to APL2 style. (Indeed, perhaps such
> resources exist and I apologize if I have merely not encountered them yet.
> I have yet to study in-depth the older 'Finn APL idiom library' and
> similar).
>
> As for adding tacit style to GNU APL, I do not advocate one way or the
> other, as I do not have sufficient experience for an informed opinion. How
> much value would the 'tacit' syntax bring to GNU APL? Would it even be
> possible to add without breaking APL2 conformance?
>
> I also see a lot of usage online of 'guards' within lambdas which GNU APL
> seems to lack -- would the language benefit from adding support for that or
> would many of you say it is just 'syntactic sugar'?
>
> Just some thoughts from an APL newcomer. I enjoy it, and am grateful to
> Dr. Sauermann et al. for their hard work.
>
> -Russ
>
>

Reply via email to