Raul >Most languages have their deficits. This is one as i spoke up about and tried >to encourage good steps at amelioration. Ragged arrays is another, as i have >noted earlier.
> Extending the capabilities of extended arrays may well be a good backdoor to > this capability. i do hope Dan goes along that line. >As for myself, i am totally out of commission for the next few years, at >least, rebuilding my living situation. i have been absorbed in that for 4 >years and at least now have a dwelling ... somewhat along the lines >~bright_plan_f. ---~ http://i.tgu.ca/bright_plan_f greg ~krsnadas.org -- from: Raul Miller <[email protected]> to: Programming forum <[email protected]> date: 13 August 2015 at 18:49 subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Bitwise operations utility >If by "bit type", you mean a type that can take on 1/0, then I disagree. >If by bit, you mean a representation which takes advantage of all bits in an >interval of memory, I also disagree. >However, if by "bit type" you mean a type which takes on 1/0 values where >those 1/0 values are packed to take advantage of all bits in an interval of >memory, then I agree. >But, yes, resistance - some of that is embedded in the hardware design (of >modern CPUs), and some of that has to do with the amount of work needed in >software to compensate for the hardware issues. This could almost double the >size of the interpreter. >That said, if you feel inclined to develop support for bits as a densely >packed type, other people might appreciate your work. (Indexing might be good >places to start?) Thanks, Raul -- from: greg heil <[email protected]> to: Programming forum <[email protected]> date: 13 August 2015 at 18:06 subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Bitwise operations utility Raul >You may have a better word for what i call bit-boolean if so i accede to your >greater knowledge. i and my colleagues just referred to it as boolean 40 or 50 >years ago. Things may have changed in the language. However it is >incontrovertible that there is no bit type in J. i also contend there has been >a long standing resistance to having such. There may be extenuating reasons, >but it is definitely the poorer for those who would use such. greg ~krsnadas.org -- from: Raul Miller <[email protected]> to: Programming forum <[email protected]> date: 13 August 2015 at 15:35 subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Bitwise operations utility On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 5:15 PM, greg heil <[email protected]> wrote: >>i wrote my undergraduate thesis (in APL) using the manipulation of Boolean >>matrices (categories, and many other algebra objects - with arbitrarily large >>sizes). i always disliked J because of its avowed anti-Boolean typology. >>Another thing to be worked around. Boolean means different things to different people. >There's George Boole's approach, for example, and there's later work which >constrains the scope to truth values. >Which are you talking about, here? And, why do you call J's approach >"anti-Boolean"? >(We can take this to chat, if that helps - if we won't be discussing >programming.) Thanks, Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
